jftLVªh la- Mh- ,y- (,u) 04@0007@2003µ05
REGD. NO. D. L. (N) 04/0007/2003—05
izkf/dkj ls izdkf'kr
PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY
lkIrkfgd
WEEKLY
la- 37]
ubZ fnYyh, flrEcj 7] 2014—flrEcj 13] 2014] 'kfuokj@Hkkæ 16—Hkkæ 22] 1936
No. 37]
NEW DELHI, SEPTEMBER 7, 2014—SEPTEMBER 13, 2014, SATURDAY/BHADRA 16—BHADRA 22, 1936
Hkkx esa fHkUu i`"B la[;k nh tkrh gS ftlls fd ;g i`Fkd ladyu ds :i esa j[kk tk lds
Separate Paging is given to this Part in order that it may be filed as a separate compilation
Hkkx II—[k.M 3—mi&[k.M (ii)
PART II—Section 3—Sub-section (ii)
Hkkjr ljdkj ds ea=kky;ksa (j{kk ea=kky; dks NksM+dj) }kjk tkjh fd, x, lkafof/d vkns'k vkSj vf/lwpuk,a
Statutory Orders and Notifications Issued by the Ministries of the Government of India
(Other than the Ministry of Defence)
3445 GI/2014
(6139)
foÙk ea=kky;
(foÙkh; lsok,a foHkkx)
ubZ fnYYkh] 21 ebZ] 2014
dk-vk- 2433.—dsUnzh; ljdkj] jktHkk"kk (la?k ds 'kkldh;
iz;kstuksa ds fy, iz;kstuksa ds fy, iz;ksx) fu;e] 1976 ds fu;e
10 ds mi&fu;e (4) ds vuqlj.k esa layXu vuqca/ esa mfYyf[kr
fuEufyf[kr cSadksa dh lwphc¼ 'kk[kkvksa@dk;kZy;ksa dks ftuds 80
ls vf/d deZpkfj;ksa us fgUnh dk dk;Zlk/d Kku izkIr dj fy;k
gS] vf/lwfpr djrh gS A
Øe la- cSad ds uke
'kk[kkvksa dh la[;k
1-
Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad
45
2-
LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj
53
3-
vka/zk cSad
48
4-
bafM;u vksojlht cSad
183
dqy
329
[iQk- la- 11016@13@2013&¯gnh]
MkW- osn izdk'k nwcs] la;qDr funs'kd (jk-Hkk-)
jktHkk"kk fu;e] 1976 ds fu;e 10 (4) ds varxZr
vfèklwfpr fd, tkus okys dk;kZy;ksa@'kk[kkvksa dh lwph
Øekad
'kk[kk dksM
'kk[kk dk uke vkSj irk
(1)
(2)
(3)
1-
11961
Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad
lar ckck Hkwjh okys ds lkeus]
rju rkju jksM] ve`rlj
jkT; % iatkc] fiu % 143006
2-
14651
Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad
#2320@14] esu cktkj]
cl LVSaM] ve`rlj]
jkT; % iatkc] fiu % 143001
3-
15903
Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad
54] vkbZ,u,iQ&chMhbZ]
Mªhe ySaM ds lkeus]
xsV ua- lhih&6 [kklk]
ftyk % ve`rlj]
jkT; % iatkc] fiu % 143017
6140
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
4-
16308
Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad
,lthvkjlh gkfLiVy]
Nijk ¯lg] egrk jksM]
ve`rlj]
jkT; % iatkc
fiu % 143501
5-
5286
Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad
lh,lh]
Vkmu gky] ve`rlj]
jkT; % iatkc
fiu % 143001
6-
16142
Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad
n'kes'k LohV 'kkWi ds lkeus]
dkWyst jksM] xqjnkliqj]
jkT; % iatkc
fiu % 143521
7-
16421
Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad
¯lcy pkSd ds ikl]
eequ] iBkudksV]
jkT; % iatkc
fiu % 145001
8-
14657
Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad
#219] xka/h uxj]
xqjnkliqj jksM]
iBkudksV]
jkT; % iatkc
fiu % 145001
9-
5292
Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad
lh , lh] eq[; 'kk[kk Hkou]
<kaxq jksM] iBkudksV]
jkT; % iatkc
fiu % 145001
10-
15875
Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad
{ks=kh; O;olk; dk;kZy;]
<kaxq jksM] iBkudksV]
jkT; % iatkc
11-
13515
Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad
dqjkyh]
ftyk % eksgkyh]
jkT; % iatkc
fiu % 140103
12-
14630
Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad
cwFk ua- 51]
lSDVj&40 lh]
paMhx<+
fiu % 160036
13-
14656
Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad
#1010] lSDVj&68] eksgkyh
ftyk % eksgkyh]
jkT; % iatkc
fiu % 160071
14-
16309
Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad
126] fVªC;wu dkWyksuh ds lkFk]
jsyos jksM] cyVkuk]
ftyk % eksgkyh]
jkT; % iatkc
fiu % 140604
15-
16413
Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad
paMhx<+ ;wfuo£lVh dSEil]
[kjM+&eks¯jMk jksM] [kjM+]
ftyk % eksgkyh]
jkT; % iatkc
fiu % 140413
16-
5283
Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad
lh , lh] lSDVj&7 lh]
paMhx<+
fiu % 160007
17-
17022
Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad
;w vkbZ bZ Vh]
lSDVj&25]
paMhx<+
fiu % 160014
18-
15904
Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad
fxy ekdsZV Jh csj lkfgc jksM]
lqYrkuiqj yks/h]
jkT; % iatkc
fiu % 144626
19-
16141
Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad
okMZ&4] ih,uch pkSd ds ikl]
esu jksM] VkaMk
jkT; % iatkc
fiu % 144204
(1)
(2)
(3)
(1)
(2)
(3)
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6141
20-
16144
Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad
303 Mh&II] csyk pkSd] jksiM+]
jkT; % iatkc
fiu % 140001
21-
15874
Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad
{ks=kh; O;olk; dk;kZy;]
HkwfiUnhj Iyktk] lj¯gn jksM]
ifV;kyk]
jkT; % iatkc
22-
1623
Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad
Ñf"k fodkl 'kk[kk]
xkao % la/kSj]
rglhy % eyjsdksVyk]
jkT; % iatkc
fiu % 148020
23-
1759
Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad
eq[; 'kk[kk]
ifV;kyk xsV] lax:j]
jkT; % iatkc
fiu % 148001
24-
1762
Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad
dkWyst jksM]
eysjdksVyk]
jkT; % iatkc
fiu % 148023
25-
2333
Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad
xkao o Mkd[kkuk % /ukSyk]
ftyk % cjukyk]
jkT; % iatkc
fiu % 148105
26-
3316
Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad
ekuoh] ftyk % lax:j]
jkT; % iatkc
fiu % 148023
27-
3317
Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad
'ksjksa] ftyk % lax:j]
jkT; % iatkc
fiu % 148106
28-
4200
Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad
xkao o Mkd[kkuk % /wjh]
ftyk % lax:j]
jkT; % iatkc
fiu % 140051
(1)
(2)
(3)
(1)
(2)
(3)
29-
5575
Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad
ykM~Mk dksBh]
ftyk % lax:j]
jkT; % iatkc
fiu % 148034
30-
5577
Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad
vukt eMh lquke]
ftyk % lax:j]
jkT; % iatkc
fiu % 148028
31-
6341
Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad
cjukyk]
jkT; % iatkc
fiu % 148101
32-
7400
Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad
baMfLVª;y ,fj;k] lax:j]
jkT; % iatkc
fiu % 148001
33-
7509
Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad
xkao o Mkd[kkuk % iQrsgx<+ iatxzkb±
ftyk % lax:j]
jkT; % iatkc
fiu % 148025
34-
7521
Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad
phek tks/iqj]
ftyk % cjukyk]
jkT; % iatkc
fiu % 148103
35-
11913
Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad
vgenx<+]
ftyk % lax:j]
jkT; % iatkc
fiu % 141001
36-
11914
Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad
ubZ vukt eaMh] cjukyk]
ftyk % cjukyk]
jkT; % iatkc
fiu % 148101
37-
11915
Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad
egy dyka]
ftyk % cjukyk]
jkT; % iatkc
fiu % 148101
6142
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
38-
15031
Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad
yhyk Hkou pkSd] ifV;kyk]
1066@7] xq#}kjs ds ikl]
d'ehfj;ka] f=kijh]
ftyk % ifV;kyk]
jkT; % iatkc
fiu % 147001
39-
16489
Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad
ubZ vukt eaMh]
Hkokuh x<+]
ftyk % lax:j]
jkT; % iatkc
fiu % 148026
40-
16508
Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad
,jkor 'kkW¯ix dkWEIysDl]
ifV;kyk dSaV]
ftyk % ifV;kyk]
jkT; % iatkc
fiu % 147001
41-
16198
Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad
vkj-th-,u-;w- vkWiQ ykW fl/qoky]
Hkknlku jksM] fl/qoky]
ftyk % ifV;kyk]
jkT; % iatkc
fiu % 147001
42-
16199
Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad
flVh czkap] eaMh xks¯cnx<+]
iksLV vkWfiQl jksM]
eaMh xks¯cnx<+]
ftyk % iQrsgx<+ lkfgc]
jkT; % iatkc
fiu % 147301
43-
5179
Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad
rukoxzLr vkfLr iquZokl 'kk[kk
lsDVj&7lh]
paMhx<+]
fiu % 160007
44-
5272
Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad
rukoxzLr vkfLr iquZokl 'kk[kk
fo- ok- 'kk[kk] igyk ry]
,llhvks&5] jathr ,osU;w]
ve`rlj]
jkT; % iatkc
fiu % 143001
45-
16901
,y th 'kks:e ds lkFk
gsedqaM isVªksy iEi ds lkeus
lj¯gn jksM] ifV;kyk]
jkT; % iatkc
fiu % 147004
46-
LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj
fouksckuxj ,DlVsa'ku] lkxj]
ftyk % f'keksxk&577401
47-
LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj
uanh;ky jksM] dMFkh&583137
gjiugYyh] ftyk % nko.kxsjs
48-
LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj
gksleus ,DlVsa'ku 'kk[kk]
ek:rh Ñik fcYMhax]
lqcÕ;k gkWfLiVy ds ikl]
tsy jksM] f'keksxk
49-
LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj
Ñ".kk dSisQ]
vÕ;k vkdsZM]
nhid isVªksy iai ds lkeus]
cad] ch-,p- jksM]
f'keksxk&577201
50-
LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj
#778@1] nwxkZ vafcdk Ldwiy jksM]
ljLorh uxj] cMkous]
Mko.kxsjs&577005
51-
LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj
#1946@lh] nwxkZorh vkdsZM]
ih-ch- jksM] Mko.kxsjs&577006
52-
LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj
lhVh,l] ua- 48@lh]
IykWV ua- 36]
cl LVSaM ds ikl] vUuhxsjh&582201
ftyk % /kjokM
53-
LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj] vyukoj]
fcYMhax ua- 401] okMZ ua- 1] bafnjkuxj]
f'kokth gkWfLiVy ds lkeus]
cl LVSaM ds fiNs] vyukoj]
ftyk % /kjokM
54-
LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]
Vh,elh ua- 1281]
oh-,e- ekyxh dkWEIysDl]
oqQLrkxh jksM] xtsanzx<+&582114]
ftyk % xnx
(1)
(2)
(3)
(1)
(2)
(3)
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6143
55-
LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]
lhVh,l ua- 3891@2ch]
'kkaHkoh esMhdYl] oqQach dkWEIysDl]
gksVy T;ksfr ds lkeus] ctkj jksM]
y{es'oj&582116
ftyk xnx
56-
LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]
fjIijuisVs iksLV vkWfiQl ds lkeus]
lkxj jksM] fjIiuisVs]
gkslkuxj rkyqdk]
ftyk % f'keksxk&577426
57-
LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]
xzke % tMs] ljksck rkyqdk]
ftyk % f'keksxk&577419
58-
LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]
esu jksM] ryxqIikj] lkxj rkyqdk]
ftyk % f'keksxk&511430
59-
LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]
iqjkuk cl LVSaM dkWEIysDl]
f'kjkydksIik] lksjkck rkyqdk]
ftyk f'keksxk&511428
60-
LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]
IykWV ua- 109 vkSj 110] jktkth uxj]
lrqdj] /kjokM&580009
61-
LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]
79@,] 12@,lih E;wfufliy ua-
10920] okMZ Ø- 14 xqatu dkWEIysDl]
lIriqj] /kjkokM&580001
62-
LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]
lhVh,l ua- 1986] 1987 vkSj 1988]
U;w bafXy'k LowQy ds ikl]
cksEekaiqj] ihch jksM]
gqcyh&580028
63-
LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]
nko.kxsjs ;qfuo£lVh dSEil]
f'koxaxks=kh] rksykgkSl] nko.kxsjs
ftyk % nko.kxsjs
64-
LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]
,ih,elh dkWEIysDl]
cl LVSaM ds ikl]
lokukSj] gkosjh
65-
LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]
oqaQMxksy 'kk[kk] /kjokM]
'ksVVkj vksuh] oqQaMxksy&581113
ftyk % /kjokM
66-
LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]
fe=k ysvkmV] eaMsgYyh jksM]
fo|k uxj] fp=knwxZ
67-
LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]
#1956@lh3] nwxkZorh vkdsZM]
'kadj fogkj] gfjgjk jksM]
,yvkblh vkiQ bafM;k ds ikl]
nko.kxsjs
68-
LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]
IykWV ua- 109 vkSj 110]
jktkth uxj] lÙkqj] /kjokM]
ftyk % /kjokM
69-
LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]
fon~;kuxj] vuqxzg] ch-,p- jksM]
fon~;kuxj] f'keksxk] f'keksxk
70-
LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]
xqMMnk vkdsZM] lkxj jksM] f'keksxk]
f'keksxk
71-
LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]
Vhihlh 853 Mh@Mh1@Mh 2]
ih Mh] 'ksVVkj dkWEys vkDlj]
ds,lvkjVhlh cl LVSaM]
ghjsds:j] ghjsds:j
72-
LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]
uoyxqaM 'kk[kk]
x.ks'k dkWEysDlh]
cl LVSaM ds ikl] uoyxqaM]
ftyk % /kjokM
73-
LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]
cadkiqj 'kk[kk
lhVh,l ua- 1986] 1987] 1988]
U;wc bafXy'k LowQy] cEeiwj vksfu]
ih vkj jksM] gqcyh
74-
LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]
JhjkgVVh 'kk[kk] cqjcqjs fcYMhax]
pqCchx jksM] cl LVSaM ds ikl]
JhjkgVVh&582 120] ftyk xnx
(1)
(2)
(3)
(1)
(2)
(3)
6144
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
75-
LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]
xqtekxMh jkSu rkyqdk]
xqtekxMh xzke] ftyk % xnx
76-
LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]
lhVh,l ua- 3133] eqYykjuch ØkWl]
xnx esu jksM] jksu] xnx
77-
LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]
xkSjEek egkjktisV fcYMhax]
iqjkuh ,lchvkbZ fcYMhax]
u;s cl LVSaM ds ikl]
gkuxy
78-
LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]
ihch ua- 3] ,lohih dkWyksuh]
lkxj rkyqdk] tksx iQkYLy]
f'keksxk ds ikl
79-
LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]
esu jksM] lkxj rkyqdk]
ryxqIikj] f'keksxk
80-
LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]
eqaMjxh 'kk[kk]
MkW- okbZ,l- esVh fcYMhax]
ts-,- dkWyst] esu jksM]
eaqaMjxh&580118 ftyk % xnx
81-
LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]
iksLV ckWDl 1] ch-,p- jksM]
fuMhxs ihvks]
ftyk % f'keksxk] esykokxksIikc]
gfjxs
82-
LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]
IykWV ua- 2] vkj ,l ua- 10]
CykWd ua- 2] fpDdaudksIik]
Jh pUukohj vkU/zk]
dY;k.k vkJe dkWEysIikDl]
esu jksM] uokuxj] gqcyh
83-
LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]
,ih,e ds ikl] gqcyh dkjokj jksM]
dy?kVxh] dy?kVxh] xnx
84-
LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]
lh,lVh ua- 2115@2116]
Vh,elh jksM] ekdsZV]
ujxqan
85-
LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]
f'kXxkauo 'kk[kk] jk;dj fcYMhax]
iqjkus cl LVSaM ds ikl]
f'kXxkauo&581205]
ftyk % gkosjh
86-
LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]
gsCcklwj 'kk[kk]
la- 122] czkfgu xyh]
gsCcklqj xkao fiu&571342
pkejktuxj rkyqd]
ftyk&pkejktuxj
87-
LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]
gqX;k 'kk[kk la- 502]
feU;e eq[; ekxZ]
gqX;k xk¡o fiu&571444]
dksYysxky rkyqd]
ftyk&pkejktuxj
88-
LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]
gksaxkuwj 'kk[kk]
1@6] czkfáu xyh]
gksaukuwj rkyqd]
ftyk&pkejktuxj
89-
LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]
nksbfMbanqokMh 'kk[kk
ua- 1489] jktdh; mPp fo|ky;
ekxZ] nksbfMbanqokMh xk¡o]
fiu&571443
dksYysxky rkyqd pkejktuxj
90-
LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]
;sjxkEcYyh 'kk[kk]
ua- 907@1] u;k foLrkj]
eaMy iapk;r jksM]
;sjxkEcYyh&571441
;syanwj rkyqd
ftyk&pkejktuxj
91-
LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]
'kX;k 'kk[kk]
xknZu gkSl rksfe;kj ikY;e jksM]
'kX;k xk¡o] dksYysxky rkyqd]
ftyk pejktuxj
92-
LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]
VsYyuqj 'kk[kk
ua- 30 ekjEek xyh
VsYyuqj 571440
(1)
(2)
(3)
(1)
(2)
(3)
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6145
93-
LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]
vEckys 'kk[kk
ua- 107] ,l-lh- xyh
vEckys xk¡o fiu&571441]
;sykUnqj rkyqd
ftyk pkejktuxj
94-
LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]
xksuhdksIiy 'kk[kk]
gjhn'kZu vkdsZM]
xksuhdksIiy eq[; ekxZ]
fojktisV rkyqd
ftyk dksMxq
xksuhdksIiy 571213
95-
LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]
egkuanh dkEIysDl
ih-,p- ekxZ] csV~Vniqjk
isfj;kisVuk rkyqd
csV~Vniqjk
96-
LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]
gyxqj 'kk[kk
688@1] 686@1,]
nsofxjh] pUuiV~Vuk ekxZ]
1st Øksl] gyxqj&571421
eyoYyh rkyqd
97-
LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]
csYyqj Økl 'kk[kk]
338 'ksV~Vh dkEIysDl
;synYyh ekxZ ch-xh- uxj]
iksLV&cYyqj]
gkscyh&571418
ukxeaxyk rkyqd
98-
LVsV cSad vkWiQ eSlwj]
eSlwj esfMdy dkWyst 'kk[kk]
esfMdy dkWyst Hkou]
jsyos LVs'ku ekxZ]
eSlwj&570001
99-
vkU/zk cSad
dksÙkjisV 'kk[kk
lwjoje jksM
rqfu&533401
iwoZ xksnkojh ftyk
vkU/z izns'k
100-
vkU/zk cSad
cjukyk 'kk[kk]
czkbl Iykj”kk]
ds lh ekxZ] cjukyk
iatkc&148101
101-
vkU/zk cSad
ukHkk 'kk[kk]
ljdqyj jksM ckSju xsV]
ukHkk&147201
102-
vkU/zk cSad
lax:j 'kk[kk]
'kghn Hkxr ¯lg pkSd]
lax:j] iatkc&148001
103-
vkU/zk cSad
xqaMeiYyh 'kk[kk]
fnykojiqj eaMy]
vkfnykckn ftyk]
vkU/zk izns'k&504306
104-
vkU/zk cSad
cksFk 'kk[kk]
ljdkjh twfu;j dkWyst jksM]
cksFk] vkfnykckn ftyk]
vkU/zk izns'k&504305
105-
vkU/zk cSad
dksÙkjdks.Mka 'kk[kk] eq[;k jkLrk]
HkhensojiYyhr eaMy
djheuxj ftyk
vkU/zk izns'k&505471
106-
vkU/zk cSad
dqdquwj 'kk[kk]
edku ua- 7&91@1]
eq[;u jkLrk] dqdquwj]
[kEeue ftyk
vkU/zk izns'k&507114
107-
vkU/zk cSad
Hkksiky 'kk[kk]
la- 36] HknHkík jksM]
Hkksiky]
eè; izns'k&462063
108-
vkU/zk cSad
y[kumQ 'kk[kk]
16] fo/ku lHkk ekxZ]
y[kuÅ] mÙkj izns'k&226018
(1)
(2)
(3)
(1)
(2)
(3)
6146
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
109-
vkU/zk cSad
bykgkckn 'kk[kk]
iksLV ckWDl ua- 9992]
tkWUlu xat] 158] iUnjhck]
bykgkckn] mÙkj izns'k]
fiu 211003
110-
vkU/zk cSad
xhrk okfVdk 'kk[kk]
eSdsfudy odZ'kkWi] m-iw- jsyos]
xksj[kiqj] mÙkj izns'k&273012
111-
vkU/zk cSad
vkj ds uxj 'kk[kk]
e-la- 111@155] IykWV la- 5]
dfudk vLirky ds ikl]
g"kZ uxj] dkuiqj]
mÙkj izns'k&208012
112-
vkU/zk cSad
dpgjh 'kk[kk]
flfoy dksV ifjlj]
xksj[kiqj] mÙkj izns'k&273001
113-
vkU/zk cSad
v'kksdk xkMZu 'kk[kk]
iz;kl Hkou] tsy jksM]
Hkksiky] eè; izns'k
114-
vkU/zk cSad
v;ksè;k uxj 'kk[kk]
49] tqfu;j ,e vkbZ th]
v;ksè;k uxj]
Hkksiky eè; izns'k&462041
115-
vkU/zk cSad
bfUnjk uxj 'kk[kk]
lsDVj 9] bafnjk uxj]
y[kumQ] mÙkj izns'k&226016
116-
vkU/zk cSad
rkjkeaMy 'kk[kk]
xksj[kiqj fodkl izkf/dj.k]
jkex< rky] nsofj;k ckbZikl]
xksj[kiqj] mÙkj izns'k
117-
vkU/zk cSad
vkye ckx 'kk[kk] ds,l,e Vkoj]
lh ih&1] vkye ckx]
y[kumQ] mÙkj izns'k&226004
118-
vkU/zk cSad
flfoy ykbZUl 'kk[kk]
ifj.k; oq¡Qt] 1@174] flfoy ykbUl]
ckx iQjtkuk jksM] vkxjk]
mÙkj izns'k&282002
119-
vkU/zk cSad
vyhx<+ 'kk[kk]
4@1399 'kgtkn ekdsZV]
tkfe;k mQnwZ] esfMdy jksM]
flfoy ykbZUl]
vyhx<+] mÙkj izns'k&202002
120-
vkU/zk cSad
cqyUn'kgj 'kk[kk]
235] flfoy ykbZUl]
dkyk vke] cqyan 'kgj]
mÙkj izns'k&203001
121-
vkU/zk cSad
cjsyh 'kk[kk]
35,@8] jkeiqj xkMZu]
cjsyh] mÙkj izns'k&243001
122-
vkU/zk cSad
eFkqjk 'kk[kk]
1947@1 vkSj , dkfyUnh oq¡Qt]
nkfEi;j uxj] LVs'ku jksM]
eFkqjk] mÙkj izns'k&281001
123-
vkU/zk cSad
lgkjuiqj 'kk[kk]
3@6783] ¯yd jksM]
ghjks gksaMk ,tsalh ds lkeus]
lgkjuiqj] mÙkj izns'k&247001
124-
vkU/zk cSad
eqtÝiQjuxj 'kk[kk]
313@1 nf{k.k Hkksik jksM]
eqtÝiQj uxj] mÙkj izns'k&251001
125-
vkU/zk cSad
eqjokMk 'kk[kk]
IykWV la- 31]58] 86 o 87@2]
t; n;ky jksM] lqHkk"k jksM]
eqjokMk (dVuh) eè; izns'k
126-
vkU/zk cSad
fefJ[k 'kk[kk] fefJ[k 'kk[kk]
ukgj pkSjkgk] lhrk iqj jksM] feljh[k]
mÙkj izns'k&261401
(1)
(2)
(3)
(1)
(2)
(3)
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6147
127-
vkU/zk cSad
'kgtukoka 'kk[kk]
iqjkuk eaxy cktkj] 'kkgtuok]
xksj[kiqj] mÙkj izns'k&273209
128-
vkU/zk cSad
vrjkSyh 'kk[kk]
vrjkSyh [kk] dkWyst jksM]
xkso/Zu /ke] vrjksyh vyhx<+]
mÙkj izns'k&202280
129-
vkU/zk cSad
[kyhykckn 'kk[kk]
xksyk cktkj] esu ekdsZV]
lar dchj uxj] [kyhykckn]
mÙkj izns'k&272175
130-
vkU/zk cSad
elwjh 'kk[kk]
eokuk jksM] elwjh]
esjB] mÙkj izns'k&250001
131-
vkU/zk cSad
ckjkcadh 'kk[kk]
oekZ ekdsZV iwohZ Nksj]
iSQtkckn jksM] ckjkcadh]
mÙkj izns'k&225001
132-
vkU/zk cSad
lhrkiqj 'kk[kk]
,e ,e esgjks=kk Hkou]
13&ch LVs'ku jksM] lhrkiqj]
mÙkj izns'k
133-
vkU/zk cSad
nsofj;k 'kk[kk]
IykWV la= 328] dksrokyh jksM]
nsofj;k mÙkj izns'k&274001
134-
vkU/zk cSad
esMjkikj 'kk[kk]
enkjiqj xkao]
iks- c[khjk] cxqyh CykWd]
lar dchj uxj]
mÙkj izns'k&272159
135-
vkU/zk cSad
o`Unkou 'kk[kk]
225] je.k jsrh] Jh th iSysl]
o`Unkou] mÙkj izns'k&281121
136-
vkU/zk cSad
xkserh uxj 'kk[kk]
xksirh uxj&] fou; [kaM]
y[kumQ] mÙkj izns'k&226010
137-
vkU/zk cSad
/kuqiwjk 'kk[kk] xk¡o yks/hiqj]
jktiwr] fnYyh jksM]
/kuqiwjk ftyk eksjknkckn]
mÙkj izns'k&244102
138-
vkU/zk cSad
fctukSj 'kk[kk] ';ke fogkj]
fdjkriqj jksM] fctukSj y[kumQ
mÙkj izns'k&226701
139-
vkU/zk cSad
iYyoiqje 'kk[kk]
lh&3@1] ikWdsV&Vh]
iYyoiqje&isQt&II]
esjB] mÙkj izns'k&250110
140-
vkU/zk cSad
vkSax 'kk[kk] xkao ,oa iksLV vkSax]
th Vh jksM] ftyk iQrgiqj]
mÙkj izns'k&212665
141-
vkU/zk cSad
fot;uxj 'kk[kk]
;qth&18] 19 o 20] xzkmaM Ýyksj]
eaxy IykWV la- A-1PU-4]
dkWe£'k;y Ldhe] ,ch jksM]
fot; uxj] bUnkSj]
eè; izns'k&452001
142-
vkU/zk cSad
fodkl uxj 'kk[kk]
lh ih&1] ih th vkoj]
oqQ'khZ jksM] fodkl uxj]
y[kumQ] mÙkj izns'k&226010
143-
vkU/zk cSad
fnYyh jksM 'kk[kk] xk¡/h dkWEIysDl]
nsgyh jksM] eqjknkckn]
mÙkj izns'k&244001
144-
vkU/zk cSad
>kalh 'kk[kk]
372@44&45] Xokfy;j jksM]
flfoy ykbZUl] >kalh]
mÙkj izns'k&284001
(1)
(2)
(3)
(1)
(2)
(3)
6148
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
145-
vkU/zk cSad
bVkok 'kk[kk]
759&C] g"kZ uxj] dpgjh jksM]
bVkok] mÙkj izns'k&206001
146-
vkU/zk cSad
xks.Mk 'kk[kk]
edku la- 45] xqM~Mwey pkSjkgk]
ekyoh; uxj] xks.Mk]
mÙkj izns'k&271001
147-
vdcjk&3051
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
xzke vdcjk] iksLV % vjrksuh]
rglhy&fdjkoyh]
ftyk&vkxjk&2820079 (m-iz-)
148-
,Vk&2997
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
gksVy f'k[kj] vkxjk jksM]
U;w cl LVS.M ds ikl]
,Vk&207001 (m-iz-)
149-
fiQjks”kckn&3011 bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
eq[; Mkd?kj ds lkeus]
vkokl fodkl dkyksuh]
lqgkx uxj]
fiQjks”kkckn&283201 (m-iz-)
150-
o`gr dkjiksjsV
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
'kk[kk (2745) o`gr dkjiksjsV 'kk[kk]
prqFkZ ry]
jpuk flusek fc¯YMx]
2 jktsUnz Iysl] iwlk jksM]
ubZ fnYyh&110008
151-
feM dkjiksjsV
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad]
'kk[kk (2746) o`gr dkjiksjsV 'kk[kk]
prqFkZ ry] jpuk flusek fc¯YMx]
2 jktsUnz Iysl] iwlk jksM]
ubZ fnYyh&110008
152-
taxiqjk (2792) bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad]
115] efLtn jksM taxiqjk
ubZ fnYyh&110014
153-
dh£ruxj (2964) bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad]
1&107, Hkw&ry] dh£ruxj]
ubZ fnYyh&110015
154-
lsDVj&11
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad]
jksfg.kh]
frfr{kk ifCyd LowQy lsDVj&11]
(3248)
jksfg.kh] ubZ fnYyh&110085
155-
cnjiqj (3249) bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad]
416] fudV rqxydkckn esVªks LVs'ku]
eFkqjk jksM] cnjiqj] ubZ fnYyh&110044
156-
vtesj 476
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
vkj-lh- MkW;lu lkslkbVh vkWiQ
vtesj dsljxat] vtesj]
fiudksM % 305001] ftyk vtesj
157-
vyoj 385
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
;w th ,iQ Mªhe”k]
lkeus ljdkjh cPpksa dk vLirky]
u”knhd iqjkuk ikWoj gkmQl jksM]
xkSjo ikFk] vyoj 'kgj]
fiudksM&301001] ftyk vyoj
158-
vyoj xsV]
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
vtesj 1668
ulhjkckn jksM] vyoj xsV]
vtesj] fiudksM&305001]
ftyk&vtesj
159-
ckWEcs eksVj
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
l£dy] tks/iqj 'kks#e ua- 3] j.kohj Hkou]
ukSoh pkSilkuh jksM]
tks/iqj fiudksM&342001
160-
cuh ikdZ 562
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
,@lh&2] t;¯lg l£dy]
u”knhd dksySDVksjsV] cuh ikdZ]
t;iqj] fiudksM&302006]
ftyk t;iqj
161-
HkhyokM+k 1487 bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
ua- 1&5] vkdkj VkWoj]
iqjkuk vkjVh vks jksM] HkksyokMk]
fiudksM&311001] ftyk&HkhyokM+k
162-
chdkusj 1608
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
8 iksdj DokWVj] pkSijk dryk]
jkuh ck”kkj] chdkusj]
fiu 5 334001] ftyk % chdkusj
163-
fHkokM+h 2166
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
IykV la- 3A/7] ;w vkbZ Vh dkWyksuh]
xkSjo ikFk] fHkokM+k
164-
Lh&Ldhe 2137 bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
J-54-C lujkbZl] i`Fohkt jksM]
lh&Ldhe] t;iqj]
fiudksM % 302001]
ftyk&t;iqj
(1)
(2)
(3)
(1)
(2)
(3)
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6149
165-
nsoyh 2371
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
IykWV ua- 1] izse oqaQt]
ihNs ihj ckck] iVsy uxj]
nsoyuh] fiu % 304804
ftyk & Vksad
166-
iQrsgiqj 1404
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
17 ifjgkj 'kkW¯ix lSaVj]
fldkfj;k pkSjkgk 'ksgkorh] iQrsgiqj]
fiu % 332301] ftyk&lhdj
167-
,e-vkbZ jksM
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
158
11 Írqjkt fc¯YMx] ,e-vkbZ- jksM]
t;iqj] fiu% 302001] ftyk t;iqj
168-
tks/iqj 901
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
IykWV ua- 1] lu'kkbu fc¯YMx
(igyk ry)] ubZ lM+d]
tks/iqj fiu % 342001
ftyk&tks/iqj
169-
fd'kux<+ 1909 bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
IykWV ua- Mh- 108 (,&2)]
,u ,p&8] fd'kux<+]
fiu % 305801] ftyk&vtesj
170-
dksVk 1471
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
15 cYyHk uxj] jkorork jksM]
dksVk fiu % 327004]
ftyk&dksVk
171-
djkSyh 2228
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
vt; fuokl] xqykc ckx]
djkSyh fiu& 322241]
ftyk&djkSyh
172-
[ksrM+h uxj
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
2173
lSaVªy LowQy dSEil 1]
[ksrM+h uxj]
>qU>quq fiu % 333504]
ftyk&>qU>quq
173-
dksfYgu uxj
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
481
lh&17] dksfygu uxj]
[ksrM+h] fiu % 333503]
ftyk&>qU>quq
174-
ekyoh; uxj
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
1549
Mh&672] ekyoh; uxj]
t;iqj fiu % 302017]
ftyk t;iqj
175-
ekuljksoj 1622 bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
vkbZ vkbZ vkj ,e dSEil]
VSxksj ekxZ] lsDVj 11]
vxzoky iQkeZ]
ekuljksoj]
t;iqj] fiu& 302020]
ftyk&t;iqj
176-
eqckjdiqj 653 bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
u”knhd cl LVSaM] fd'kux<+ jksM]
xzke ,oa Mkd[kkuk] eqckjdiqj]
fiu % 301025] ftyk&vyoj
177-
jktsUnz uxj
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
2174
C/o vkn'kZ fo|k eafnj LowQy]
jktsUnz uxj] vyoj
fiu % 301001] ftyk&vyoj
178-
:ickl 3100
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
,l 42&45]
ouLFkyh eksM Mkd[kkuk]
fuokbZ rqYd baMLVªh;y {ks=k]
11 Mh lSaVj] xzke :ickl]
fiu % 304022 ftyk 5 Vksad
179-
lhdj jksM 1693 bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
Jh Hkokuh fudsru dkWyst dSEil]
lhdj jksM] t;iqj
fiu 5 302023 ftyk&t;iqj
180-
lhrkiqjk 1926
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
th&89] bZ ih vkbZ ih]
vkj vkbZ vkbZ lh vks baMLVªh; {ks=k]
lhrkiqjk
181- Jhxaxkuxj 1917 bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
5&,&8 ehjk ekxZ] tokgj uxj]
Jhxaxkuxj] fiu % 335001
ftyk&Jhxaxkuxj
182- fryd uxj 381 bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
4 'kkW¯ix lSaVj] fryd uxj ekdsZV]
fryd uxj] t;iqj]
fiu % 302004] ftyk&t;iqj
183- mn;iqj 695
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
10 iap'khy ekxZ
(lkeus VkmQu gkWy) igyk ry]
mn;iqj fiu % 313001]
ftyk&mn;iqj
(1)
(2)
(3)
(1)
(2)
(3)
6150
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
184-
oS'kkyh uxj
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
1539
¶,iQ&CykWd¸ IykWV ua- ,l-vkj 3&,]
u”knhd dE;wfuVh lSaVj]
vejikyh ekxZ] oS'kkyh uxj] t;iqj]
fiu % 302021] ftyk&t;iqj
185-
, vkj ,e
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
t;iqj 2576
{ks=kh; dk;kZy;] t;iqj] igyk ry]
fj¼h VkWoj] ,l ch&57] ckiw uxj]
VkWd jksM] t;iqj&302015
186-
ekapok 3223
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
xzke ekapok] eq[; dyoj jksM]
u”knhd iapk;r lfefr]
rglhy >ksVokMk]
t;iqj fiu % 302012
y[kumQ {ks=k
187-
vkfLr olwyh
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
izca/u 2594
vouokbZ esa'ku] fo/ku lHkk ekxZ]
y[kumQ&226001] m-iz-
188-
cgjkbp] 2675 bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
flfoy ykbal] Lusg mRlo ds lkeus]
bafnjk LVsfM;e ds ikl]
ftyk cgjkbp&271801] m-iz-
189-
xksaMk] 2676
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
edku ua- 331] eksgYyk Nsnhiqjok]
cMxk¡vo iqfyl pkSdh cgjkbp jksM]
ftyk xksaMk] m-iz- fiu 271002
190-
dUukSt] 2978
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
7 ljkbZ cgknqj]
ftyk dUukSt] m-iz-]
fiu&209725
191-
iQrsgiqj] 2990 bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
176@154 lh] Ñ".kk Vkoj]
dysDVj xat]
ftyk iQrsgiqj] 212601 m-iz-
192-
xksfoUn uxj]
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
3022
126@,iQ&1] xksfoUn uxj]
ftyk dkuiqj nsgkj]
m-iz-] fiu&208006
193-
fdnobZ uxj]
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
3024
1334@34 ¶vks¸ Cykd]
fdnobZ uxj] ftyk&dkuiqj nsgkr]
m-iz-] fiu&208023
194-
egkuxj] 3025 bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
ch&67] lsDVj&lh]
egkuxj] y[kumQ&226006] m-iz-
195-
jSfiM fjVsy
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
lsaVj] 3056
uopsruk dsanz] 10 v'kksd ekxZ]
y[kumQ&226001] m-iz-
196-
Hkw;s emQ] 3071 bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
xzke o i=kky;&Hkw;s emQ]
ektjk eqfygk emQ]
ftyk&jk;cjsyh&229001] m-iz-
197-
vgek emQ]
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
3072
i`Foh xsLV gkml ds lkeus]
lqyrkuiqj jksM] vgek emQ]
y[kumq&226002] m-iz-
198-
fl/kSyh] 3195
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
Vhpj dkyksuh]
cgknqjiqj] xk¡/h fo|ky; baVj dkyst
ds lkeus]
fl/kSyh&261303]
ftyk&lhrkiqj] m-iz-
199-
caFkjk] 3232
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
jktiwr ufl±x gkse]
caFkjk Fkkus ds lkeus]
caFkjk fldUnjiqj&227101]
ftyk&y[kumQ] m-iz-
200-
vk; lekt
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
jksM] 3001
Mh-,-oh- dkWyst fc¯YMx] izFke ry]
vk;Z lekt jksM] eqtÝiQjuxj]
fiu 251001 m-iz-
201-
vkj-th- b.Vj& bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
dkWtst] 2803
vkj-th- b.Vj dkWyst] Nhih VSad]
esjB] fiu 251001 m-iz-
202-
'kkgtgk¡iqj]
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
2801
xVqdk ykWt] xksfoUn xat 'kk[kk]
ftyk&'kkgtgk¡iqj]
fiu 242001 m-iz-
203-
fctukSj] 3002
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
Hkwry] flfoy ykbal 11]
uqekb'k eSnku ds lkeus]
ftyk fctukSj]
fiu 246701 m-iz-
(1)
(2)
(3)
(1)
(2)
(3)
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6151
204-
lgkjuiqj] 2981 bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
fof'k"V ,l ,e bZ 'kk[kk] ,&8]
vkokl fodkl] fnYyh jksM]
lgkjuiqj] fiu 247001 m-iz-
205-
vejksgk] 2980 bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
Hkwry] iDdk ckx] fctukSj jksM]
T;ksfrck iwQysuxj] vejksgk]
fiu 244221 m-iz-
206-
ihyhHkhr 'kk[kk] bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
2802
ihyhHkhr 'kk[kk] 94&v'kksd dkWyksuh]
flfoy ykbal] lkmFk ihyhHkhr]
fiu 262001 m-iz-
207-
psnkSlh 'kk[kk]
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
2800
pankSlh 'kk[kk] 2&lkdsr dkWyksuh]
pankSlh] fiu 202412 m-iz-
208-
iQrqgk 2761
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
esu jksM] xSl xksnke ds ikl]
nfj;kiqj] u;k Vksyk] iQrqgk]
ftyk iVuk] fiu dksM&803201
209-
usmQjk 3062
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
lqjsUnz esfMdy dkWyst ,oa gkWfLiVy]
f'kokyk eksM ds ikl]
usmQjk] ftyk&iVuk]
fiu dksM&801113
210-
dk¡Vh 2760
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
'kadj ekdsZV] dk¡Vh pkWd]
iksLV vkWfiQl ds ikl] eq”kÝiQjiqj]
fiu dksM&843109
211-
eksfrgkjh 2851 bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
f}rh; ry 'kj.k dkWEIysDl]
VkmQu gkWy eksfrgkjh]
f”kyk&iwohZ pEikj.k]
fiu dksM&845401
212-
nqYyhiV~Vh
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
3206
xzk- ,oa iksLV&nqYyhiV~Vh]
Fkkuk t;uxj]
f”kyk&e/qcuh] fiu dksM&847226
213-
eksgucfj;e
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
3207
xzk- eksgucfj;e]
iksLV vkWfiQl dUgkSyh]
}kjk&ldjh] ftyk&e/qcuh]
fiu dksM&847239
214-
uoknk 2865
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
izFke ry] xk;=kh nsoh Hkou]
iqjkuk cl LVs.M] x;k jksM ij uoknk]
fiu dksM&805110
215-
fd'kuxat 2913 bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
'kcue ekdsZV if'peikyh pkWd]
fd'kuxat] fiu dksM&855108
216-
lklkjke 3167
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
Jh Jh ckykth dkWEIysDl]
th-Vh- jksM] ftyk % jksgrkl]
lklkjke fiu dksM&821115
217-
csfr;k 3168
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
ek#fr esdj fc¯Mx] lqfiz;k jksM]
csfr;k] ftyk&if'pe pEikj.k
fiu dksM&845438
218-
lh-ch-vks- 3012 bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
flVh cSad vkWfiQl]
401 vk/kjf'kyk dkWEIysDl]
nf{k.kh xk¡/h eSnku] iVuk]
f”kyk&iVuk] fiu dksM&800001
219-
vkj-vkj-lh-
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
3013
vkj-vkj-lh]
401 vk/kjf'kyk dkWEIysDl]
nf{k.kh xk¡/h eSnku] iVuk]
f”kyk&iVuk] fiu dksM&800001
220-
lSfud dkyksuh] bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
iQjhnkckn]
,llh,iQ 66 lSfud dkWyksuh]
3349
lsDVj&49] de£'k;y ekdsZV]
viksftV Mh,oh LowQy]
iQjhnkckn&121001
221-
lsDVj&8]
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
iQjhnkckn]
,llh,iQ 203] lsDVj&8]
3376
gqMk ekdsZV] iQjhnkckn
222-
vkj-vkj-lh-]
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
xqMxk¡o] 3343
izFke ry] ;kno Hkou]
vksYM jsyos jksM]
xqM+xk¡o&122001
223-
lsDVj&5]
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
xqM+xk¡o] 3374
nqdku ua- 2]
'khryk vlksfl,V~l ds ikl]
'khryk ekrk eafnj jksM]
viksftV lsDVj&5] xqM+xk¡o
(1)
(2)
(3)
(1)
(2)
(3)
6152
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
224-
Ntkjlh]
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
uks,Mk] 3178
lh,p CykWd xk¡o] Ntkjlh]
viksftV lsDVj&63]
uks,Mk&201307
225-
'kjiQkckn]
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
uks,Mk] 3315
lsDVj&73] y{eh dkWEiysDl]
'kjiQkckn] uks,Mk&201301
226-
tyiqjk]
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
gynksuh] 3364 [kljk ua- 689]
pkS/jh fcckjh ¯lg ekdsZV]
tyiqjk gynksuh eksM+]
iksLV&oqQys'kjk&201306
227-
lsDVj&22]
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
uks,Mk] 3375
viksftV ts&55] xk¡o pkSjk]
lsDVj&22] uks,Mk&201301
228-
Íf"kds'k
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
(1458)
vksedkjkuan Hkou] equh dh jsrh]
Íf"kds'k&249201
ftyk&fVgjh x<oky
229-
gYnokuh
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
(1467)
gksVy dkark]
dkark dkEiySDl 10&220]
cjsyh jksM] gY}kuh]
ftyk uSrhrky&263139
230-
usg: dkWyksuh
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
(1489)
iks-cks-ua- 94] 160]
usg: dkWyksuh] gfj}kj jksM+
nsgjknwu&248001
231-
:nziqj (1591) bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
,l-ts-,-Mh 'kkW¯ix dkWEiysDl
uSrhrky jksM] :nziqj]
m/e ¯lg uxj&263153
232-
gfj}kj (1692) bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
'kkfr oqaQt ds ikl] Hkwirokyk]
gfj}kj&249410
233-
iVsyuxj
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
(2383)
32] dks&vkWijsfVo b.MfLVª;y ,fj;k]
idsy uxj]
nsgjknwu&248002
234-
dksVnokj
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
(2543)
egs'ojh vksVkseksckby ds ikl]
uthckckn jksM] dksV}kj&246149
235-
<a<sjk (2544)
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
xzke o iksLV MaMsjk&247667]
ftyk gfj}kj (mÙkjk[k.M)
236-
uSuhrky
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
(2804)
111&112] rYyhrky] uSuhrky
237-
ckxs'oj
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
(2900)
rglhy jksM] ckxs'oj 'kk[kk]
ftyk&ckxs'oj&263642
238-
f'kokfyd uxj bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
(2901)
94&v'kksd isQ”k&1]
ykbft;e xSLV gkmQl]
ch-,p-b-,y-] jkuhiqj&249403]
ftyk gfj}kj] mÙkjk[k.M
239-
Hkk:okyk xzkaV
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
(3113)
iks-cks- dySEu VkmQu]
nsgjknwu&248002
240-
cgknqjiqj tV
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
(3211)
xk¡o&cgknqjiqjtV]
CykWd cgknjkckn]
ftyk gfj}kjk&249404
241-
ljkbZ (3212)
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
xk¡o&ljkbZ] CykWd cgknjkckn]
ftyk&gfj}kjk&249404
242-
ekylh (3213) bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
xk¡o&ekylh] CykWd lgliqj]
ftyk&nsgjknwu&248003
243-
ukFkuiqjk
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
(3214)
xk¡o&ukFkuiqj] iks-vks-&usg: xzke]
CykWd jk;iqj]
ftyk&nsgjknwu&248010
244-
eksFkjksokyk
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
(3215)
xk¡o&eksFkjksokyk] CykWd jk;iqj]
rglhy&iNoknwu]
ftyk&nsgjknwu&248115
245-
nsgjknwu]
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
{ks=kh;
{ks=kh;] dk;kZy;] 595]
dk;kZy;
efyd pkSd] nsgjknwu
(2952)
fiu&246006
246-
fneuh 2536
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
edku ua- 67] uxjk ckck jksM]
iksLV&fneuh] rglhy&vack]
ftyk eqjSuk&476134
(1)
(2)
(3)
(1)
(2)
(3)
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6153
247-
jk;: 2553
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
10 o 11 jketh ekdsZV] oqQySFk jksM]
feykoyh jsyos LVs'ku ds ikl]
jk;j&474010] ftyk Xokfy;j
248-
bUnkSj&feM
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
dksiksZjV 2639
Ldhe ua- 54]
Jh lR; lkabZ fo|kfogkj dEikm.M]
ckEcs gkfLiVy jksM] fot; uxj]
bUnkSj] fiu&452010
249-
nfr;k 2640
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
edku la- 99@2]
uxj ikfydk Hkou ds lkeus]
nfr;k] eè; izns'k&475661
250-
FkkVhiqj&
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
Xokfy;j
edku la- 88] e;wj lkdsr]
2655
FkkVhiqj] ftyk&Xokfy;j]
eè; izns'k&474011
251-
fHk.M 2656
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
edku la- 363] okMz la- 12]
Xokfy;j eq[; ekxZ] fHk.M]
eè; izns'k&477001
252-
jhok 2872
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
,u,p-&7] cl LVS.M ds ikl]
vkfnR; gksVy ds cxy esa]
jhok] e-iz-
253-
ckyk?kkV 2873 bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
okMZ la- 15] esu jksM ckyk?kkV]
ckyk?kkV] e-iz-
254-
[krjiqj 2954
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
IykWV ua- 243] 24 tokgj ekxZ]
Nrjiqj&471001 ftyk&Nrjiqj
255-
xquk 2956
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
IykWV ua- 96] esu jksM]
xquk&473001] ftyk&xquk
256-
tkSjh 2958
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
cht Hk.Mkj ds lkeus] tkSjk jksM]
tkSjh&476001] ftyk eqjSuk
257-
eanlkSj 2957
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
65@1] Mh vkj ih ykbu]
emQ uhep jksM]
eanlkSj&458001]
ftyk&eanlkSj
258-
uhep 2936
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
20] Ldhe ua- 1]
Vkmu gky jksM]
uhep&458441] ftyk&uhep
259-
iqjkuh Nkouh
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
2953
losZ ua- 882] ,-ch- jksM]
VkVk eksckby Vkoj ds ikl]
iqjkuh Nkouh&474101]
ftyk&Xokfy;j
260-
flouh 2959
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
436] egkohj ef<+;k ds ikl]
th-,u- jksM] eaxyhisB] vktkn okMZ]
flouh&480661 ftyk&flouh
261-
iqjkluh 3132
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
Hkou la- 3733] , CykWd]
fLFkSyh jsyos LVs'ku ds ikl]
jsyos ¯Lizx iSQDVjh ds lkeus]
xzke iqjluh]
iksLV&vkbZ-Vh-,e- dkWyst]
fiu&474001] ftyk&Xokfy;j
262-
uSuksn 3131
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
IykWV ua- 139] xka/h uxj]
xzke&uSuksn 453112]
ftyk bankSj
263-
Hkojlyk 3130 bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
IykV ua- 40] 41 'kkdacjh]
,osU;w dkWyksuh]
iksLV&Jh vj¯onks ,l vks]
xzke&Hkkojlyk 453555]
ftyk&bUnkSj
264-
ihify;k
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
ckt[kku
IykWV ua- 7 o 8]
3133
ihify;k ckt[kku jksM]
Hkkukiqj&462010]
ftyk&Hkksiky
265-
lruk 3188
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
[kljk ua- 252] lruk fc¯YMx]
jhok jksM] lruk&485001]
ftyk&lruk
266-
ohjiqj 3189
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
eyh ukdk] ohjiqj&474001]
ftyk&Xokfy;j
(1)
(2)
(3)
(1)
(2)
(3)
6154
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
LIST OF OFFICES/ BRAN
(4) OF OFFICIAL LANGU
267-
cksjnk 3209
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
vkYVhesV baxfy'k foyk]
esu dksykj jksM]
xzke&cksjnk&462042
ftyk&Hkksiky
268-
ckyksn (2534) bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
iqjkus cl LVsaM ds fudV]
ljnkj ysu] ckyksn
ftyk&nqxZ] fiu&491226
269-
cSoaqQBiqj
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
(2657)
IykV ua- 7] Cykd ua- 8]
esu jksM] cSoaqQBiqj]
ftyk&dksfj;k] fiu&497335
270-
lerk dkWyksuh
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
(2984)
lh&97] lerk dkWyksuh]
jk;iqj] ftyk&jk;iqj
fiu&492001
271-
th-bZ- jksM
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
(2985)
lkb± Vkoj]
vktkn iqfyl LVs'ku ds fudV]
vackikjk] jk;iqj]
ftyk&jk;iqj fiu&492001
272-
fgjhZ (3227)
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
fgjhZ] fHkyk eqvk ds fudV]
iksLV&fgjhZ] ftyk&fcykliqj]
fiu&495222
273-
jk¡ph eq[;
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
'kk[kk (0366) vkRekjke Hkou] ,e th ekxZ]
jk/s';ke ysu] jk¡ph]
fiu % 834001] ftyk&jk¡ph
274-
te'ksniqj
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
(0424)
10 flYoj dst ekWy (izFke ry)
Mk;xksuy jksM] fcLrqiqj]
te'ksniqj] fiu % 831001]
if'pe ¯lgHkwfe
275-
cksdkjks LVhy
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
lhVh (1246)
iqjkuk cktkj ckb ikl jksM]
pkWl ihvks] cksdkjks]
fiu 827013] ftyk % cksdkjks
276-
/uckn (0593) bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
cSad eksM] dVjl jksM] /uckn]
fiu&826001] ftyk&/uckn
277-
cfj;krq jksM
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
(0672)
vkejikyh fc¯YMx]
cfj;krq jksM] vkj ,e lh ,p]
ih-vks- jk¡ph]
fiu % 834008]
jk¡ph] ftyk % jk¡ph
278-
Dyc jksM
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
(1563)
xksLuj dkWyst] tsy ppZ dkWEiysDl]
esu jksM] jk¡ph fiu dksM % 834001]
ftyk % jk¡ph
279-
iq:fy;k jksM
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
(1508)
xzke xq: ,Mqds'ku dsanz]
iq:fy;k jksM jk¡ph]
fiu % 834001] ftyk % jk¡ph
280-
gtkjhckx
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
(1486)
jes'k dkWEiysDl] cksíke ck”kkj]
ds-ch- ekxZ] gtkjhckx]
fiu 5% 825301] ftyk>kjhckx
281-
Mdjk (0558) bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
Mdjk dksfy;kjh [ksyjh]
ih-vks- Mdjk]
fiu&829210] ftyk&jk¡ph
282-
dkads jksM
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
(1639)
lsaVªy dksyfiQYM fy-] dkads jksM]
tokgj uxj] jk¡ph]
fiu % 834009] ftyk % jk¡ph
283-
ekuxks (1564) bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
e/qlq/u nsosUnz yksd dkWEiysDl]
fMek jksM] ekuxks]
te'ksniqj] fiu % 831013]
ftyk % iwoZ ¯lgHkwfe
284-
ejkj (0454)
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
jk¡ph jksM] ejkj]
fiu % 829117]
ftyk % jkexj
285-
ckjhMhg
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
(1511)
ejlh vLirky cjhMhg]
te'ksniqj] fiu % 831017]
ftyk % iwohZ ¯lgHkwfe
286-
usojh (0783)
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
fodkl fo|ky; usojh]
fiu % 835217] jk¡ph
(1)
(2)
(3)
(1)
(2)
(3)
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6155
287-
[kwVh (1182)
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
vij pkSd] esu jksM] [kwVh
fiu % 835210] ftyk % [kwVh
288-
nso?kj (1570) bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
izFke ry ,y vkbZ lh fc¯YMx]
dpgsjh jksM] nso?kj fiu % 814112
ftyk % nso?kj
289-
fxjhMhg
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
(0590)
edViqj ,lchvkb ekxZ] fxjhMhg]
fiu % 815301] ftyk % fxjhMhg
290-
xqeyk (1544) bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
lkjnk ekdsZV dkWEiysDl]
ikydksV jksM] xqeyk]
fiu % 835207] ftyk % xqeyk
291-
lsDVj 9
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
(1839)
lsDVj 9,] ¶ch¸ jksM]
cksdkjks LVhy flVh]
fiu % 827009 ftyk % cksdkjks
292-
vkfnR;iwj
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
(3003)
gksy¯Mx ua- 1839] izFke ry]
VkVk dsUnz] esu jksM]
vkfnR;iqj] fiu % 832109
ftyk % ljkbdsyk [kjlok
293-
Myrksuxat
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
(3021)
lwjt uxj] csyokfrdj]
pkSd (esnuh uxj)] Myrksuxat]
iksLV&Myrksuxat] fiu % 822101
ftyk % iykew
294-
pØ/jiqj
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
(3141)
iqjkuk jk¡ph jksM]
jkuh lrh ,uDyso pØ/jiqj]
fiu % 833102]
ftyk % if'pe ¯lgHkwfe
295-
Mqejnxk
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
(3152)
xzkmaM Ýyksj jktlFkyh bUdyso]
ih-,l- lnj] ih-vks- usojh]
xzke&Mqejnxk] fiu % 835217
ftyk % jk¡ph
296-
vksjeka>h
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
(3170)
eerk ekdsZV] fkkuk vksjeka>h]
xzke&njnax (vksjeka>h)]
ih-vks- vksjeka>h]
fiu % 835219] ftyk % jk¡ph
297-
ykyxat
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
(3321)
iratfy vkjksX;e ds ikl]
[ksyxk¡o] ih-vks-&lqxuq] ykyxat]
fiu % 835103] ftyk % jk¡ph
298-
bykgkckn
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
0350
61] ,e th ekxZ] flfoy ykbal]
bykgkckn] fiu % 211001]
ftyk&bykgkckn
299-
okjk.klh
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
0370
lh 7&34] ygqjkchj esu Øk¯lx]
okjk.klh] fiu % 221001]
ftyk % okjk.klh
300-
xksj[kiqj]
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
0452
fot;k pkSd] xksj[kiqj]
fiu % 273001] ftyk&xksj[kiqj
301-
iqQyiqj
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
biQdks
f?k;k uxj] bykgkckn]
dkEiysDl]
tkSuiqj jksM] iqQyiqj]
0595
fiu % 212404] ftyk % bykgkckn
302-
okjk.klh dSaV]
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
1002
52 ,oa 53 iVsy uxj dkyksuh]
¯eV gkml ds ikl] unslj]
okjk.klh dSaV fiu % 221002]
ftyk % okjk.klh
303-
eukSjh] 1523
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
th Vh jksM] ,;jiQkslZ LVs'ku xsV]
xq:}kjk ds lkeus] eukSjh]
fiu % 212208] ftyk % bykgkckn
304-
vk”kex<+]
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
1604
jek dkEIysDl] iafMr nhu n;ky pkSd]
flfoy ykbu] vk”kex<+]
fiu % 276001] ftyk % vk”kex<+
305-
fe”kkZiqj]
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
1618
czápkjh dk oqaQvk]
fj”koZ iqfyl ykbu ds ikl]
ohvkbZih jksM] fe”kkZiqj]
fiu % 231001] ftyk % fe”kkZiqj
306-
iQkfrek
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
vLirky]
u;k ckbZikl jksM] taxy lkfyxzke]
xksj[kiqj]
iMjh ck”kkj] xksj[kiqj]
1906
fiu % 273001]
ftyk&xksj[kiqj
(1)
(2)
(3)
(1)
(2)
(3)
6156
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
307-
Xysufgy LowQy] bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
okjk.klh] 1968 Xysufgy LowQy]
eaMqvkMhg] okjk.klh]
fiu % 221103]
ftyk % okjk.klh
308-
lsaV tkslsiQ
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
LowQy]
flfoy ykbzal] xksj[kiqj]
xksj[kiqj]
fiu % 273009]
1972
ftyk % xksj[kiqj
309-
cSad jksM
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
'kk[kk] 2067
72] cSad jksM xksj[kiqj]
mÙkj izns'k] fiu% 273001]
ftyk % xksj[kiqj
310-
cM+gyxat]
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
2104
esu ekdsZV jksM] cM+gyxat]
fiu % 273402] ftyk&xksj[kiqj
311-
dkscjk ulZjh
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
LowQy]
1] dfj;Iik jksM u;k dSaV]
bykgkckn]
lc ,fj;k gsMDokVZlZ]
2163
bykgkckn] fiu&211001]
ftyk % bykgkckn
312-
fj”koZ iqfyl
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
ykbu]
fj”koZ iqfyl ykbu]
okjk.klh]
ikaMsiqj jksM]
2164
okjk.klh dSaV]
okjk.klh] fiu % 221002]
ftyk % okjk.klh
313-
izrkix<+]
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
2362
pkoyk vkdsZM] Hkaxok pqaxh]
izrkix<+] fiu % 230001]
ftyk % izrkix<+
314-
lqYrkuiqj&
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
flfoy
1077@3] flfoy ykbal]
ykbal]
cl LVSaM ds lkeus]
2386
lqYrkuiqj]
fiu % 228001
ftyk % lqYrkuiqj
315-
em vbek]
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
2471
171] LVs'ku jksM]
em vbek] bykgkckn]
fiu % 212501]
ftyk&bykgkckn
316-
fp=kowQV/ke
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
(dohZ)] 2472
440@2 }kjdk iqjh]
eankfduh jksM]
cank fMfo”ku ds lkeus]
tylaFkku] iqjkuh ck”kkj]
fiu % 210205
ftyk % fp=kowQV
317-
iV~Vh] 2511
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
gkml ua- 1] okMZ ua- 2]
flfoy ykbal] iV~Vh]
fiu % 230135
ftyk&izrkix<+
318-
egsok iV~Vh]
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
2556
46&ch] iqfyl iksLV ds lkeus]
egsok pkSd] usuh]
bykgkckn] fiu % 211007
ftyk&bykgkckn
319-
egkjktxat]
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
2557
IykWV ua- 2034] okMZ ua- 16]
dksrokyh iQjsUnz jksM]
gehn uxj] uxj ikfydk ifj"kn~]
egkjktxat] fiu % 273303]
ftyk% egkjktxat
320-
pankSyh] 2572
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
IykV ua- 453]
jek 'kadj vLirky ds cxy esa
pankSyh] fiu % 232104
ftyk % pankSyh
321-
eqxyljk;]
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
2859
gkml ua- 581] th Vh jksM]
ubZ cLrh] eqxyljk;]
fiu % 232101
ftyk % y[kumQ
322-
xk”khiqj] 2860
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
136] ldysukckn]
tsy xsV ds lkeus] xk”khiqj]
fiu % 233001]
ftyk % xk”khiqj
323-
Hknksgh] 2983
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
102] LVs'ku jksM]
eYyw rkykc] Hknksgh]
fiu % 221401
ftyk % lar jfonkl uxj
(1)
(2)
(3)
(1)
(2)
(3)
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6157
324-
cLrh] 3014
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
gkml ua- 680&,] izgykn dkyksuh]
flfoy ykbal] cLrh]
fiu % 272001] ftyk % cLrh
325-
tkSuiqj] 3015
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
gkml ua- 21&,] izHkq dkEiysDl]
gqlSukckn] ts;lh pkSjkgk] tkSuiqj]
fiu % 222001] ftyk % tkSuiqj
326-
fHk[khiqj] 3079 bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
16 ds ,p, 'kekZ VkolZ] fHk[khiqj]
iks-ck-&fe”kkZeqjkn] fiu % 221307
ftyk % okjk.klh
327-
vuijk] 3123
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
234@4] vuijk ck”kkj] flusek jksM]
iks-ck-&vuijk] fiu % 231225
ftyk % lksuHknz
328-
jkcV~Zlxat]
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
3124
IykWV ua- 337] nsonhi dkEiysDl]
pUnh frjkgk ds ikl] jkcV~Zlxat]
fiu % 231216 ftyk % lksuHknz
329-
[kyhykckn]
bf.M;u vksojlh”k cSad
3326
gkml ua- 136] okMZ ck”kkj]
mÙkj xksyk ck”kkj] usg: pkSd ds ikl]
[kyhykckn] fiu % 272175
ftyk % lar dchj uxj
MINISTRY OF FINANCE
(Department of Financial Services)
New Delhi, 21st May, 2014
S.O.
2433.—In pursuance of sub-rule (4) of rule
10 of the Official Languages (use for official purpose of the
union) Rules, 1976, the Central Government, hereby notifies
the listed branches/offices of the following Banks in the
attached annexure, more than 80% of the staff whereof
have acquired the working knowledge of Hindi.
Serial
Name of the Banks
Number of
No.
Branches/Offices
1.
State Bank of India
45
2.
State Bank of Mysure
53
3.
Andhra Bank
48
4.
Indian Overseas Bank
183
Total
329
[F. No. 11016/13/2013-Hindi]
Dr. VED PRAKASH DUBEY, Jt. Director (OL)
List of Offices/Branches to be Notified Under Rule 10 (4)
of Official Language Rule 1976
Sr.
Branch
Name & Address of the Branch
No.
Code
(1)
(2)
(3)
1.
11961
State Bank of India
Opp Sant Baba Bhuri Wale
Tarn Taran Road Amritsar
Distt. : Amritsar
State : Punjab
Pin : 143006
2.
14651
State Bank of India
#2320/14, Main Bazar,
Bus Stand, Amritsar
State : Punjab
Pin : 143001
3.
15903
State Bank of India
54 INF-BDE
Opposite Dream Land Palace
Gate No. CP-6
Khasa, State : Punjab
Pin : 143017
4.
16308
State Bank of India
SGRC Hospital, Chhapara
Singh, Mehta Road, Amritsar
Distt. : Amritsar
State : Punjab
Pin : 143501
5.
5286
State Bank of India
CAC
Town Hall, Amritsar
Distt. : Amritsar
State : Punjab
Pin : 143001
6.
16142
State Bank of India
Opp. Dasmesh Sweet Shop
College Road, Gurdaspur
State : Punjab
Pin : 143521
7.
16421
State Bank of India
Near Simbal Chowk
Mamun, Pathankot
State : Punjab
Pin : 145001
8.
14657
State Bank of India
#219, Gandhi Nagar,
Gurdaspur Road,
Pathankot
State : Punjab
Pin : 145001
(1)
(2)
(3)
6158
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
9.
5292
State Bank of India
C.A.C., Main Branch Building
Pathankot, State : Punjab
Pin : 145001
10.
15875
State Bank of India
Regional Business Office,
Dhangu Road, Pathankot
State : Punjab
11.
13515
State Bank of India
Kurali, Distt. : Mohali
State : Punjab
Pin : 140103
12.
14630
State Bank of India
Booth No. 51
Sector-40 C,
Chandigarh
Pin : 160036
13.
14656
State Bank of India
# 1010, Sector - 68,
Mohali
Distt. : Mohali
State : Punjab
Pin : 160071
14.
16309
State Bank of India
126, Adjoining Tribune Colony,
Railway Road, Baltana
Distt. : Mohali
State : Punjab
Pin : 140604
15.
16413
State Bank of India
Chandigarh University
Campus, Kharar Morinda Road
Tehsil Kharar,
Distt. : Mohali
State: Punjab
Pin : 140413
16.
5283
State Bank of India
C.A.C, Sector-7C,
Chandigarh
Pin : 160007
17.
17022
State Bank of India
UIET, Sector 25
Chandigarh
Pin : 160014
18.
15904
State Bank of India
Gill Market
Sri Ber Sahib Road,
Sultanpur Lodhi
State : Punjab
Pin : 144626
19.
16141
State Bank of India
Ward-4, Near PNB Chowk
Main Road, Tanda
State : Punjab
Pin : 144204
20.
16144
State Bank of India
303 D-II Bela Chowk, Ropar
State : Punjab
Pin : 140001
21.
15874
State Bank of India
Regional Business Office
Bhupinder Plaza, Sirhind Road,
Patiala, State : Punjab
22.
1623
State Bank of India
ADB
Vill. Sandhaur
Tehsil: Malerkotla
Distt. : Sangrur
State : Punjab
Pin : 148020
23.
1759
State Bank of India
Main Branch
Patiala Gate
Sangrur
State : Punjab
Pin : 148001
24.
1762
State Bank of India
College Road, Malerkotla
State : Punjab
Pin : 148023
25.
2333
State Bank of India
VPO : Dhanaula
Distt. : Barnala
State : Punjab
Pin : 148105
26.
3316
State Bank of India
Manvi
Distt. : Sangrur
State : Punjab
Pin : 148023
27.
3317
State Bank of India
Sheron
Distt. : Sangrur
State : Punjab
Pin : 148106
28.
4200
State Bank of India
VPO: Dhuri,
Distt. : Sangrur
State : Punjab
Pin : 140051
(1)
(2)
(3)
(1)
(2)
(3)
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6159
29.
5575
State Bank of India,
Ladda Kothi,
Distt. : Sangrur,
State : Punjab,
Pin : 148034
30.
5577
State Bank of India,
Anaj Mandi, Sunam,
Distt. : Sangrur,
State : Punjab,
Pin : 148028
31.
6341
State Bank of India,
Barnala, State : Punjab,
Pin : 148101
32.
7400
State Bank of India,
Industrial Area, Sangrur,
Distt. : Sangrur,
State : Punjab,
Pin : 148001
33.
7509
State Bank of India,
VPO: Fathegarh Panjgrian,
Distt. : Sangrur,
State : Punjab,
Pin : 148025
34.
7521
State Bank of India,
Cheema Jodhpur,
Distt. : Barnala,
State : Punjab,
Pin : 148103
35.
11913
State Bank of India,
Ahmedgarh,
Distt. : Sangrur,
State : Punjab,
Pin : 141001
36.
11914
State Bank of India,
New Grain Market, Barnala,
Distt. : Barnala,
State : Punjab,
Pin : 148101
37.
11915
State Bank of India,
Mehal Kalan,
Distt. : Barnala,
State : Punjab,
Pin : 148101
38.
15031
State Bank of India,
Leela Bhawan Chowk,
1066/7, Near Gurudwara,
Kashmirian, Tripri, Patiala,
Distt. : Patiala,
State : Punjab,
Pin : 147001
39.
16489
State Bank of India,
New Grain Market,
Bhawanigarh, Distt. : Sangrur,
State : Punjab, Pin : 148026
40.
16508
State Bank of India,
Airawat Shopping Complex,
Patiala Cantt, Distt. : Patiala,
State : 147001
41.
16198
State Bank of India,
RGNU of Law Sidhuwal,
Bhadson Road, Sidhuwal,
Distt. : Patiala,
State : Punjab,
Pin : 147001
42.
16199
State Bank of India,
City Branch,
Post Office Road,
Mandi Gobindgarh,
Distt. : Fatehgarh Sahib,
State : Punjab,
Pin : 147301
43.
5179
State Bank of India,
Stressed Assets Recovery,
Branch, Sector-7C,
Chandigarh,
Pin : 160007
44.
5272
State Bank of India,
Sarb Amritsar,
Spl Comm. Branch, Ist Floor,
Ranjit Avenue, Amritsar,
Pin- 143001
45.
16901
State Bank of India,
Adjacent LG Show Room,
Near Hemkund Petrol Pump,
Sirhind Road , Patiala,
Distt. : Patiala,
State : Punjab,
Pin : 147004
46.
State Bank of Mysore,
Vinobanagar Extension, Sagar,
Shimoga Distt. 577 401
47.
State Bank of Mysore,
Nandyal Road, Kadthi - 583 137
Harapanahalli Taluk,
Davanagere Distt.
48.
State Bank of Mysore,
Hosamane Extension Branch,
Maruti Krupa Building,
Near Subaiyya Hospital,
Jail Road, Shimoga
(1)
(2)
(3)
(1)
(2)
(3)
6160
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
49.
State Bank of Mysore,
"Ayya Arcade"
Opp: Deepak Petrol Bunk
B H Road, Shimoga - 577 201
50.
State Bank of Mysore,
# 778/1, Durgambika School
Road,
Saraswathi Nagar Badavane
Davanagere - 577 005
51.
State Bank of Mysore,
# 1946/C-3, Duggavathi Arcade
P B Road, Davangere - 577 006
52.
State Bank of Mysore,
CTS No. 48/C, Plot No. 36,
Near Bus Stand, Annigeri - 582 201,
Dharwad District
53.
State Bank of Mysore,
Building No. 401, Ward No.1,
Indiranagar,
Opp. Sajivini Hospital,
Behind Bus Stand,
Alnavar - 581 103, Dharwad
54.
State Bank of Mysore,
TMC No. 1281,
V M Malagi Complex,
Kustagi Road,
Gajendragad - 582 114,
Gadag District
55.
State Bank of Mysore,
CTS No. 3891/2B,
Near Shambavi Medicals,
Kumbi Complex,
Opp Hotel Jyothi, Bazaar Road,
Lakshmeshwar - 582116
Gadag District
56.
State Bank of Mysore,
Opp: Post Office, Sagar Road,
Ripponpete Hosanagar Taluk,
Shimoga Distt. -577 426
57.
State Bank of Mysore,
Jade Village, Soraba Taluk,
Shimoga Distt. - 577 419
58.
State Bank of Mysore,
Main Road, Talaguppa,
Sagar Taluk,
Shimoga Distt. - 577 430
59.
State Bank of Mysore,
Old Bus Stand Complex,
Shiralakoppa, Soraba Taluk,
Shimoga Distt. - 577 428
60.
State Bank of Mysore,
Plot No. 109 & 110,
Rajajinagar, Sattur,
Dharwad - 580 009
61.
State Bank of Mysore,
79/A, 12/SP Municipal No.10920,
Ward No. 14,
Gunjan Complex,
Saptapur, Dharwad - 580 001
62.
State Bank of Mysore,
CTS No. 1986, 1987, & 1988,
Near New English School,
Bommapur Oni, P B Road,
Hubli - 580 028
63.
State Bank of Mysore,
Davangere University Campus,
Shivagangotri, Tolahunse,
Davangere
64.
State Bank of Mysore,
APMC Complex,
Near Bus Stand, Savanur,
Haveri
65.
State Bank of Mysore,
Kundagol Branch,
Dharwad Shettar Oni,
Kundagol - 581 113
Dharwad District
66.
State Bank of Mysore,
Mitra Layout,
Medehalli Road, Chitradurga
67.
State Bank of Mysore,
# 1946/C3 , Duggavathi Arcade,
Harihara Road, Near LIC of India,
Davangere
68.
State Bank of Mysore,
Plot No. 109 & 110, Rajajinagar,
Sattur, Dharwae, Distt. Dharwad
69.
State Bank of Mysore,
Anugraha, B.H. Road,
Vidyanagar, Shivamogga,
Shivamogga
70.
State Bank of Mysore,
Guddada Arekere, Sagara Road,
Shimoga, Shimoga, Shimoga
71.
State Bank of Mysore,
TPC 853 D/D1/D2,
P. D. Shetter Complex,
Near KSRTC Bus Stand,
Hirekerur
(1)
(2)
(3)
(1)
(2)
(3)
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6161
72.
State Bank of Mysore,
Navalgund Branch,
Ganesh Complex,
Near Bus Stand,
Navalgund - 582 208,
Dharwad District.
73.
State Bank of Mysore,
CTS No 1986, 1987, 1988,
Opp: New English School,
Bammapur Oni, P R Road, Hubli
74.
State Bank of Mysore,
Shirahatti Branch, Burbure
Building, Chubbi Road,
Near Bus Stand,
Shirahatti - 582 120,
Gadag District
75.
State Bank of Mysore,
Gujamagadi 582 102 Ron Taluk,
Gujamagadi Village, Gadag
76.
State Bank of Mysore,
C.T.S. No.3133,
Mullanbhavi Cross,
Gadag Main Road, Ron, Gadag
77.
State Bank of Mysore,
Gowramma Maharajpet Building,
Old SBI Building,
Near New Bus Stand,
Hangal
78.
State Bank of Mysore,
PB No. 3 S.V.P Colony,
Sagar Taluk, Jogfalls,
Near Shivmoga
79.
State Bank of Mysore,
Talguppa, Shimoga
80.
State Bank of Mysore,
Mundargi Branch,
Dr. Y.s. Meti Building,
Opp. J.A. College,
Main Road, Mundargi - 582118
Gadag District.
81.
State Bank of Mysore,
PB No. 1 B H Road Nidige PO,
Shimoga Dist, Malavagoppa,
Harige
82.
State Bank of Mysore,
Plot No. 2, R S No. 10 Block No. 2,
Chikkenkoppa,
Sri Channaveer Andhara,
Kalyan Ashram Complex, Main
Road,Navanagar, Hubli
83.
State Bank of Mysore,
Near A P M C,
Hubli-Karwar Road,
Kalaghatgi, Kalaghatgi Gadag
84.
State Bank of Mysore,
CST No. 2115/2116 ,
TMC Road, Market, Nargund
85.
State Bank of Mysore,
Shiggaon Branch,
Raikar Building,
Near Old Bus Stand,
Shiggaon - 581 205,
Haveri District.
86.
State Bank of Mysore,
Hebbasur Branch,
No. 122, Brahmin Street,
Hebbasur Village,
Pin 571 342,
Chamarajanagar Taluk,
Chamrajanagar Dist
87.
State Bank of Mysore,
Hoogya Branch,
No. 502, Minyam Main Road,
Hoogya Village,
Pin 571 444, Kollegal Taluk,
Chamrajanagar Dist
88.
State Bank of Mysore,
Honganur Branch
1/6, Brahmin Street, Honague
Taluk -Chamrajanagar Distt.
89.
State Bank of Mysore,
Doddinduvadi Branch,
No. 1489,
Govt. High School Road,
Doddinduvadi Village,
Pin -571 443, Kollegal Taluk,
Chamrajanagar
90.
State Bank of Mysore,
Yergamballi Branch,
No 907/1, New Extension,
Mandal Panchayat Road,
Yergamballi-571 441
Yelandur Taluk,
Chamrajanagar Dist
91.
State Bank of Mysore,
Shagya Branch, Garden House,
Thomiyar Palyam Road,
Shagya Village - 571 440
Kollegal Taluk,
Chamrajanagar Dist
(1)
(2)
(3)
(1)
(2)
(3)
6162
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
92.
State Bank of Mysore,
Tellanur Branch,
No. 30 Maramma Street,
Tellanur -571440
93.
State Bank of Mysore,
Ambale Branch,
No. 107, S C Street,
Ambale Village,
Pin-571 441, Yelandur Taluk,
Chamrajanagar Dist
94.
State Bank of Mysore,
Haridarshan Arcade Gonikoppal,
Main Road, Virajpet TQ,
Kodagu Dist Gonikoppal-571213
95.
State Bank of Mysore,
Mahanandi Complex,
P H Road, Bettadapura,
Periyapatna Taluk, Bettadapura
96.
State Bank of Mysore,
Halagur Branch,
688/1, 686/1A,
Devagiri, Channapatna Road,
1st Cross, Halagur - 571 421
Malavalli Taluk
97.
State Bank of Mysore,
Bellur Cross Branch,
338, Setty Complex,
Yeladalli Road, B G Nagar Post,
Bellur Hobli -571418
Nagamangala Taluk
98.
State Bank of Mysore,
Mysore Medical College Branch,
Medical College Building,
Railway Station Road,
Mysore - 570 001.
99.
Andhra Bank,
Kothapet Branch,
Sooravaram Road, Tuni- 533
401 East Godavari Dist.
Andhra Pradesh
100.
Andhra Bank,
Barnala Branch, Brice Plaza,
KC Road, Barnala,
Punjab- 148101
101.
Andhra Bank,
Nabha Branch Circular Road,
Bouran Gate Nabha- 147201
102.
Andhra Bank,
Sangarur Branch,
Shahid Bhagat Singh Chowk,
Sangarur, Punjab-148001
103.
Andhra Bank,
Gundampalli Branch,
Dilawarpur Mandal,
Adilabad Dist.,
Andhra Pradesh – 504306
104.
Andhra Bank,
Boath Branch,
Govt. Junior College Road Boath
Adilabad Dist.
Andhra Pradesh 504305
105.
Andhra Bank,
Kothakonda Branch,
Main Road Bheemadevarapalli
Mandal, Karimnagar Dist.
Andhra Pradesh – 505471
106.
Andhra Bank,
Kukunoor Branch,
H.No.7-91/1 Main Road,
Kukunoor, Khammam Dist.
Andhra Pradesh- 507114
107.
Andhra Bank,
Bhopal Branch
No. 36, Bhadbhada Road,
Bhopal,
Madhya Pradesh - 462063
108.
Andhra Bank,
Lucknow Branch
16, Vidhan Sabha Marg,
Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh - 226018
109.
Andhra Bank,
Allahabad Branch,
P.B. No. 99 92, Johnson Gunj,
158, Pandariba, Allahabad,
Uttar Pradesh – 211003
110.
Andhra Bank,
Gita Vatika Branch,
Mechanical Workshop,
N.E.Railway, Gorakhpur.
Uttar Pradesh – 273012.
111.
Andhra Bank,
R.K. Nagar Branch,
H. No. 111/155, Plot No. 5,
Near Kanika Hospital,
Harsh Nagar,
Kanpur. U.P. – 208012
112.
Andhra Bank,
Kacheri Branch,
Civil Court Premises, Gorakhpur,
Uttar Pradesh – 273001
(1)
(2)
(3)
(1)
(2)
(3)
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6163
113.
Andhra Bank
Ashoka Garden Branch
Pryaas Bhavan, Jail Road,
Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh
114.
Andhra Bank
Ayodhya Nagar Branch 49,
Junior MIG Ayodhya Nagar,
Bhopal.
Madhya Pradesh - 462041
115.
Andhra Bank
Indira Nagar Branch, Sector 9,
Indira Nagar, Lucknow,
Uttar Pradesh - 226016
116.
Andhra Bank
Taramandal Branch
Gorakhpur Development
Authority,
Ramgarh Taal, Deoria Bypass,
Gorakhpur Uttar Pradesh
117.
Andhra Bank
Alam Bagh Branch
KSM 0WER, CP-1 Cinderdump,
Alam Bagh, Lucknow,
Uttar Pradesh - 226004
118.
Andhra Bank
Civil Lines Branch,
Parinay Kunj, 1/174 Civil Lines,
Bagh Farzana Road,
Agra, Uttar Pradesh - 282002
119.
Andhra Bank
Aligarh Branch 4/1399,
Azad Market,
Jamia Urdu Medical Road,
Civil Lines, Aligarh,
Uttar Pradesh - 202002
120.
Andhra Bank
Bulandshahr Branch
235 Civil Lines, Kala Aam,
Bulandshahr, Newdel
Uttar Pradesh - 203001
121.
Andhra Bank
Bareilly Branch 35 A/8 Rampur
Garden, Bareilly, Uttar
Pradesh - 243001
122.
Andhra Bank
Mathura Branch
1947/1 and A Kalindi Kunj,
Dampier Nagar, Station Road,
Mathura, Uttar Pradesh - 281001.
123.
Andhra Bank
Saharanpur Branch
3/6783 Link Road,
Opp Hero Honda Agency,
Saharanpur,
Uttar Pradesh - 247001
124.
Andhra Bank
Muzaffarnagar Branch
313/1 South Bhopa Road,
Muzaffarnagar,
Uttar Pradesh - 251001
125.
Andhra Bank
Murwara Branch
Plot No 31, 58, 86 & 87/2,
Jai Dayal Road, Subash Chowk,
Murwara (Katni)
Madhya Pradesh. Pin
126.
Andhra Bank
Mishrikh Branch
Nahar Chouraha, Sitapur Road,
Mishrikh, Uttar Pradesh. - 261401
127.
Andhra Bank
Sahjanwa Branch ,
Old Mangal Bazar,
Sahjanwa, Gorakhpur
Uttar Pradesh - 273209
128.
Andhra Bank
Atrauli Branch, College Road,
Near Govardhan Dham,
Atrauli, Aligarh,
Uttar Pradesh - 202280
129.
Andhra Bank
Khalilabad Branch
Gola Bazar, Main Market,
Sant Kabir Nagar, Khalilabad,
Uttar Pradesh - 272175
130.
Andhra Bank
Mussori Branch
Mawana Road, Mussori,
Meerut, Uttar Pradesh - 250001
131.
Andhra Bank
Barabanki Branch,
Verma Market East End,
Faizabad Road, Barabanki,
Uttar Pradesh - 225001
132.
Andhra Bank
Sitapur Branch,
M M Mehrotra Bhawan,
13 B Station Road, Sitapur,
Uttar Pradesh.
(1)
(2)
(3)
(1)
(2)
(3)
6164
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
133.
Andhra Bank
Deoria Branch
Plot No 328,
Kotwali Road, Deoria,
Uttar Pradesh - 274001
134.
Andhra Bank
Medrapar Branch
Medrapar Village,
Bakhira Post, Baghauli Block,
Sant Kabir Nagar,
Uttar Pradesh - 272159
135.
Andhra Bank
Vrindavan Branch
225 Raman Reti, Shriji Palace,
Vrindavan,
Uttar Pradesh – 281121
136.
Andhra Bank
Gomti Nagar Branch
Gomti Nagar II, Vinay Khand,
Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh - 226010
137.
Andhra Bank
Dhanupura Branch
Village Lodhipur, Rajput,
Delhi Rd, Dhanupura,
Dist. Moradabad,
Uttar Pradesh- 244102
138.
Andhra Bank
Bijnor Branch
Shyam Vihar,
Kiratpur Road, Bijnor,
Lucknow,
Uttar Pradesh - 226701.
139.
Andhra Bank
Pallavpuram Branch
C-3/1. Pocket-T,
Pallavpuram- Pahse-II,
Meerut, Uttar Pradesh - 250110
140.
Andhra Bank
Aung Branch
Village & PO Aung,
G T Road, Dist Fatehpur,
Uttar Pradesh - 212665
141.
Andhra Bank
Vijanagar Branch
UG-18, 19 & 20,
Ground Floor,
Mangal Plot No A-1PU-4,
Commercial Scheme,
AB Road, Vijay Nagar, Indore,
Madhya Pradesh - 452001
142.
Andhra Bank
Vikas Nagar Branch
CP-1, P G 0WER,
Kurshi Road, Vikas Nagar,
Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh - 226010
143.
Andhra Bank
Delhi Road Branch
Gandhi Complex, Delhi Road,
Moradabad,
Uttar Pradesh - 244001
144.
Andhra Bank
Jhansi Branch
372/44-45, Gwalior Road,
Civil Lines,
Jhansi, UP-284001
145.
Andhra Bank
Etawah Branch
759-C, Harsh Nagar,
Kachehri Road, Etawah,
UP-206001
146.
Andhra Bank
Gonda Branch H. No. 45,
Guddumal Circle,
Malviya Nagar, Gonda,
UP 271001
147.
Akbara, 3051
Indian Overseas Bank
Vll. Akbara, Post: Artoni,
Tehsil - Kirawali,
Distt. Agra - 282007 (UP)
148.
Etah, 2997
Indian Overseas Bank
Hotel Shikhar, Agra Road,
Near New Bus Stand,
Etah - 207001(UP)
149. Firozabad, 3011
Indian Overseas Bank
In front of Main Post Office,
Avas Vikas Colony,
Suhag Nagar,
Firozabad – 280201
150. Major Corporate Indian Overseas Bank
Branch, 2745
Major Corporate Branch,
Forth Floor,
Rachna Cinema Building,
2 Rajendra Place,
Pusa Road, New Delhi- 110008
151. Mid Corporate
Indian Overseas Bank
Branch, 2746
Major Corporate Branch,
Forth Floor,
Rachna Cinema Building,
2 Rajendra Place,
Pusa Road, New Delhi- 110008
(1)
(2)
(3)
(1)
(2)
(3)
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6165
152. Jungpura, 2792
Indian Overseas Bank
115, Masjid Road,
Jungpura, New Delhi- 110014
153. Kirtinagar, 2964
Indian Overseas Bank
1-107 A, Ground Floor,
Kirtinagar, New Delhi- 110015
154. Sector -11
Indian Overseas Bank,
Rohini, 3248
Titiksha Public School,
Sector -11 Rohini,
New Delhi- 110085
155. Badarpur, 3249
Indian Overseas Bank,
416, Near Tuglakabad Metro
Station,
Mathura Road, Badarpur,
New Delhi- 110044
156. Ajmer, 476
Indian Overseas Bank
R.C. Diocesan Society of Ajmer
Kesarganj,
Ajmer, Pin : 305001
Dist. Ajmer
157. Alwar, 385
Indian Overseas Bank
UGF DREAMS, Opp. Govt.
Children Hospital,
Near Old Power House Road,
Gourav Path, Alwar City,
Pin : 301001 Dist. Alwar
158. Alwar Gate
Indian Overseas Bank
Ajmer, 1668
Nasirabad Road, Alwar Gate,
Ajmer, Pin : 305001 Dist. Ajmer
159. Bombay Circle,
Indian Overseas Bank
Jodhpur, 1871
Showroom No.3,
Ranveer Bhawan,
9th Chopasani Road,
Jodhpur, Pin : 342001
160. Bani Park, 562
Indian Overseas Bank
A/C-2, Jaisingh Circle,
Near Collectorate, Bani Park,
Jaipur, Pin : 302006 Dist. Jaipur
161. Bhilwara, 1487
Indian Overseas Bank
No.1-5 Akar Towers,
Old RTO Road, Bhilwara
Pin : 311001 Dist. Bhilwara
162. Bikaner, 1608
Indian Overseas Bank
8 Pokar Quarters, Chaupra Katla,
Rani Bazar, Bikaner, Pin : 334001
Dist : Bikaner
163. Bhiwadi, 2166
Indian Overseas Bank
Plot No.3 A/7, UIT Colony,
Gaurav Path, Bhiwadi
164. C-Scheme, 2137
Indian Overseas Bank
J-54-C SUNRISE,
Prithviraj Road,
C-Scheme, Jaipur, Pin - 302001
Dist. Jaipur
165. Deoli, 2371
Indian Overseas Bank
Plot No. 1, Prem Kunj,
Behind Peer Baba Patel Nagar,
Deoli, Pin : 304804 Dist. Tonk
166. Fatehpur, 1404
Indian Overseas Bank
17 Parihar Shopping Centre,
Sikariya Chauraha, Shehawati,
Fatehpur, Pin : 332301
Dist. Sikar
167. M.I. Road,
Indian Overseas Bank
Jaipur, 158
11 Rituraj Building,
M.I. Road,
Jaipur, Pin : 302001
Dist. Jaipur
168. Jodhpur, 901
Indian Overseas Bank
Plot No. 1, Sunshine Building,
(I Floor), Nai Sarak,
Jodhpur Pin : 242001
Dist. Jodhpur
169. Kishangarh,
Indian Overseas Bank
1909
Plot No. D - 108 (A-2),
NH - 8, Kishangarh,
Pin : 305801 Dist. Ajmer
170. Kota, 1471
Indian Overseas Bank
15 Vallab Nagar,
Rawat Vata Road,
Kota, Pin : 327004 Dist. Kota
171. Karauli, 2228
Indian Overseas Bank
Ajay Niwas, Gulab Bagh,
Karauli, Pin : 322241
Dist. Karauli
172. Khetri Nagar,
Indian Overseas Bank
2173
Central School Campus No.1,
Khetri Nagar,
Jhunjhunu, Pin : 333504
Dist. Jhunjhunu
173. Kolihan Nagar,
Indian Overseas Bank
481
C-17 Kolihan Nagar,
Khetri Pin : 333503
Dist. Jhunjhunu
174. Malviya Nagar,
Indian Overseas Bank
1549
D-672 Malviya Nagar,
Jaipur, Pin : 302017
Dist. Jaipur
(1)
(2)
(3)
(1)
(2)
(3)
6166
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
175. Mansarovar,
Indian Overseas Bank
1622
IIRM Campus, Tagore Marg,
Sector 11, Agarwal Farm,
Mansarovar, Jaipur
Pin : 302020 Dist. Jaipur
176. Mubarakpur, 653 Indian Overseas Bank
Near Bus Stand,
Kishangarh Road,
Vill & Post Mubarakpur,
Pin : 301025 Dist. Alwar
177. Rajendra Nagar,
Indian Overseas Bank
2174
C/O Adarsh Vidhya Mandir
School, Rajendra Nagar,
Alwar, Pin : 301001 Dist. Alwar
178. Roopbas, 3100
Indian Overseas Bank
S 42 - 45 Vanasthali Mod P O,
Niwai Taluk Industrial Area,
11 D Center Village Roopbas,
Pin : 304022 Dist. Tonk
179. Sikar Road, 1693 Indian Overseas Bank
Sri Bhawani Niketan College
Campus, Sikar Road,
Jaipur, Pin : 302023 Dist. Jaipur
180. Sitapura, 1926
Indian Overseas Bank
G-89 EPIP, RIICO Industrial Area,
Sitapura, Jaipur, Pin : 302022
181. Sriganganagar,
Indian Overseas Bank
1917
5 - A - 8 Meera Marg,
Jawahar Nagar,
Sriganganagar, Pin : 335001
Dist. Ganganagar
182. Tilak Nagar, 381
Indian Overseas Bank
4 Shopping Centre,
Tilak Nagar Market,
Tilak Nagar, Jaipur, Pin : 302004
Dist. Jaipur
183. Udaipur, 645
Indian Overseas Bank
10 Panchasheel Marg, (Opp
Town Hall), I Floor, Udaipur, Pin :
313001 Dist. Udaipur
184. Vaishali Nagar,
Indian Overseas Bank
1539
“F - Block” Plot No. S.R. 3-A,
Near Community Centre,
Amrapali Marg, Vaishali Nagar,
Jaipur, Pin : 302021 Dist. Jaipur
185. ARM Jaipur,
Indian Overseas Bank
2576
Regional Office, Jaipur,
First Floor, Ridhi Tower,
SB-57, Bapu Nagar,
Tonk Road, Jaipur, Pin : 302015
186. Manchwa, 3223
Indian Overseas Bank
Village Manchwa,
Main Kalwar Road,
Near Panchayat Samiti,
Tehsil Jhotwara,
Jaipur, Pin : 302012
187. Asset Recovery Indian Overseas Bank
Management,
Avanbai Mansion,
2594
Vidhan Sabha Marg,
Lucknow- 226001, U.P.
188. Bahraich, 2675
Indian Overseas Bank
Civil Lines, Opp Sneh Utsav,
Near Indira Stadium,
Dist- Bahraich- 271801, U.P,
189. Gonda, 2676
Indian Overseas Bank
H.No. 331, Mohalla
Chhedipurva, Bargaon Police
Chouki, Bahraich Road,
Dist- Gonda, U.P., Pin- 271002
190. Kannauj, 2978
Indian Overseas Bank
7 Sarai Bahadur,
Dist.- Kannauj, U.P., Pin- 209725
191. Fatehpur, 2990
Indian Overseas Bank
176/ 154 C, Krishna Tower,
Collector Ganj,
DIst.- Fatehpur- 212601, U.P.
192. Govind Nagar,
Indian Overseas Bank
3022
126/ F-1, Govind Nagar,
Dist.- Kanpur Dehat,
U.P., Pin- 208006
193. Kidwai Nagar,
Indian Overseas Bank
3024
133/34 “O” Block, Kidwai Nagar,
Dist.- Kanpur Dehat,
U.P., Pin- 208023
194. Mahanagar, 3025 Indian Overseas Bank
B-67, Sector- C, Mahanagar,
Lucknow- 226006, U.P.
195. Rapid Retail
Indian Overseas Bank
Centre, 3056
Navchetna Kendra,
10 Ashok Marg,
Lucknow- 226 001, U.P.
196. Bhuye Mau,
Indian Overseas Bank
3071
Vill. & P.O.- Bhuye Mau,
Mazra Muliha Mau,
Dist.- Rae Bareli- 229001, U.P.
197. Ahma Mau, 3072 Indian Overseas Bank
Opp. Prithvi Guest House,
Sultanpur Road, Ahma Mau,
Lucknow- 226001, U.P.
(1)
(2)
(3)
(1)
(2)
(3)
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6167
198. Sidhauli, 3195
Indian Overseas Bank
Teacher Coloney, Bagadurpur,
Opp. Gandhi Vidyalay- Inter
College, Sidhauli- 261303,
Dist.- Sitapur, U.P.
199. Banthra, 3232
Indian Overseas Bank
Rajput Nursing Home,
Opp. Banthra Thana,
Banthra Sikandarpur- 227101
Dist.- Lucknow, U.P.
200. Arya Samaj
Indian Overseas Bank
Road, 3001
D.A.V. Inter College Building,
First Floor, Arya Samaj Road,
Mujjafarnagar, Pin-251001, U.P.
201. R.G.M. Inter
Indian Overseas Bank
College, 2803
R.G.M. Inter College,
Chhipi Tank, Meerut,
Pin-251001, U.P.
202. Shahajahapur,
Indian Overseas Bank
2801
Gatuka Lodge,
Govind Ganj Branch,
Distt- Shahajahapur,
Pin- 242001, U.P.
203. Bijnaur, 3002
Indian Overseas Bank
Bhutal, Civil Lines 11,
Infront of Numaish Ground,
Distt- Bijnaur, Pin- 246701, U.P.
204. Saharanpur, 2981 Indian Overseas Bank SME
Branch, A- 8, Aavas Vikas, Delhi
Road, Saharanpur, Pin- 247001,
U.P.
205.Amroha, 2980
Indian Overseas Bank Bhutal,
Pakka bhag,
Bijnaur Road, Jyotiba,
Fulenagar, Amroha,
Pin- 244221, U.P.
206. Pilibheet
Indian Overseas Bank
Branch, 2802
Pilibheet branch,
94- Ashok Colony,
Civil Lines, South Pilibheet,
Pin- 262001, U.P.
207. Chandausi
Indian Overseas Bank
Branch, 2800
Chandausi Branch,
2- Saket Colony, Chandausi,
Pin- 202412, U.P.
208. Fatuha, 2761
Indian Overseas Bank
Main Road, Near Gas Godown,
Dariyapur, Nayatola, Fatuha,
Dist Patna, Pin code: 803201
209. Neora, 3062
Indian Overseas Bank
Surendra Medical College and
Hospital, Near Shivala More,
Dist Patna, Pin Code – 801113
210. Kanti, 2760
Indian Overseas Bank
Shankar Market, Kanti Chowk,
Near Post Office, Muzaffarpur,
Pin Code – 843109
211. Motihari, 2851
Indian Overseas Bank
2nd floor Sharan Complex,
Town hall, Motihari,
Dist East Champaran,
Pin code – 845401
212. Dullipatti, 3206
Indian Overseas Bank
Vill. & Post Dullipatti,
PS Jainagar, District Madhubani,
Pin Code – 847226
213. Mohanabariam,
Indian Overseas Bank
3207
Vill Mohanbariam,
Post Kanhouli, via-Sakri,
Dist Madhubani,
Pin Code – 847239
214. Nawada, 2865
Indian Overseas Bank
1st Floor Gayatri Devi Bhavan
Old Bus Stand,
Gaya Road Par Nawada,
Pin code – 805110
215. Kishanganj, 2913 Indian Overseas Bank
Shabnam Market Paschimpali
Chowk, Kishanganj
Pin code – 855108
216. Sasaram, 3167
Indian Overseas Bank
Shree Balaji Complex,
G.T. Road, Dist: Rohtas,
Sasaram Pin Code – 821115
217. Bettiah, 3168
Indian Overseas Bank Maruti
Maker Building, Supriya Road,
Bettiah, Dist West Champaran,
Pin code – 845438
218. C.B.O, 3012
Indian Overseas Bank
City Back Office,
401 Adharshila Complex,
South Gandhi Maidan,
Patna, Dist Patna,
Pin code - 800001
219. RRC, 3013
Indian Overseas Bank
Rapid Retail Center,
401 Adharshila Complex,
South Gandhi Maidan,
Patna, Dist Patna,
Pin code - 800001
(1)
(2)
(3)
(1)
(2)
(3)
6168
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
NCR Delhi Region
220. Sainik Colony,
Indian Overseas Bank
3349
SCF 66 Sainik Colony,
Sector-49,
Commercial Market,
Opp DAV School,
Faridabad-121001
221. Sector-8,
Indian Overseas Bank
Faridabad, 3376
SCF. 203, Sector-8,
Huda Market, Faridabad
222. Rapid Retail
Indian Overseas Bank
Centre,
First Floor Yadav Bhavan,
Gurgaon, 3343
Old Railway Road,
Gurgaon-122001
223. Sector-5,
Indian Overseas Bank
Gurgaon, 3374
Shop.No. 2,
Near Sheetla Associates,
Sheetla Mata Mandir Road,
Opp Sec-5, Gurgaon
224. Chhajarsi, 3178
Indian Overseas Bank
CH Block Village, Chhajarsi,
Opposite Sector 63,
Noida-201307
225. Sharfabad,
Indian Overseas Bank
Noida, 3315
Sector-73 Lakshmi Complex,
Sharfabad, Noida-201301
226. Jalpura-
Indian Overseas Bank
Haldoni, 3364
Khasara No. 689,
Chaudhary Bibari Singh Market,
Jalpura Haldoni Mod,
Post Kuleshra-201306
227. Sector-22,
Indian Overseas Bank
Noida, 3375
Opp J-55, Village Chaura
Sector-22, Noida-201301
Dehradun Region
228. Rishikesh, 1458
Indian Overseas Bank
Omkarananda Bhawan
Muni Ki Reshikesh
Pin : 249201 Dist : Tehri Garhwal
229. Haldwani, 1467
Indian Overseas Bank
Hotel Kanta,
Kanta Complex Mangal
Parao Bareilly Road, Haldwani,
Pin : 263139 Dist : Nainital
230. Nehru Colony,
Indian Overseas Bank
1489
160 Haridwar Road,
Nehru Colony, Dehradun
Pin : 248001 Dist : Dehradun
231. Rudrapur, 1591
Indian Overseas Bank
I Floor SGAD Shopping Complex
Nainital Road, PIN : 263153
Dist : Udham Singh Nagar
232. Haridwar, 1692
Indian Overseas Bank
Near Shanti Kunj, Bhupatwala,
(Uttarakhand) Haridwar
Pin : 249410 Dist : Haridwar
233. Patel Nagar, 2383 Indian Overseas Bank
32 Co-operative Industrial Area
Patel Nagar, Dehradun
PIN : 248002 Dist : Dehradun
234. Kotdwar, 2543
Indian Overseas Bank
Near Maheswari Automobiles
Najibabad Road, Kotdwar
PIN : 246149 Dist : Garhwal
235. Dhandera, 2544
Indian Overseas Bank
P O & Vill Dhandera
Pin : 247667, Dist : Haridwar,
P O & Vill. Dhandera
Pin : 247667 Dist : Haridwar
236. Nainital, 2804
Indian Overseas Bank
111-112 M/s Gangolas Chemist’s
Talli Tal Nainital PIN : 263002
Dist : Nainital
237. Bageshwar, 2900 Indian Overseas Bank
Tehsil Road Bageshwar
PIN : 263642
Dist : Bageshwar
238. Specialized
Indian Overseas Bank
SME, Shivalik
D-17 Shivalik Nagar, Phase I,
Nagar, 2901
BHEL Elysium Guest House,
Ranipur Haridwar
PIN : 249403 Dist : Haridwar
239. Bharuwala
Indian Overseas Bank
Grant, 3113
Village Bharuwala Grant
P O Clement Town,
Dehradun TK
PIN : 248002
Dist : Dehradun
240. Bahadarpur
Indian Overseas Bank
Jat, 3211
Village: Bahadurpur Jat
Block Bahadrabad
PIN : 249404
Dist : Haridwar
241. Sarai, 3212
Indian Overseas Bank
Village Sarai
Block Bahadrabad
PIN : 249404
Dist : Haridwar
(1)
(2)
(3)
(1)
(2)
(3)
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6169
242. Malsi, 3213
Indian Overseas Bank
Village Malsi
Block Sahaspur
PIN : 248003
Dist : Dehradun
243. Nathan Pur, 3214 Indian Overseas Bank
Village Nathan Pur
Post Office Nehru Gram
Block Raipur
PIN : 248010
Dist : Dehradun
244. Motharo
Indian Overseas Bank
Wala, 3215
Village Motherowala
Block Raipur
Teh: Pachchua Doon
PIN : 248115
Dist : Dehradun
245. Dehradun
Indian Overseas Bank
Regional
595 Indira Nagar, Malik Chowk,
Office, 2952
Dehradun Pin : 248006
Uttaranchal
Bhopal Region
246. Dimni, 2536
Indian Overseas Bank
H. No. 67, Nagara Baba Road,
Post-Dimni, Tehsil - Amba,
District - Morena – 476134
247. Rairu, 2533
Indian Overseas Bank
11 & 11, Ramji Market,
Kulaith Road,
Near Milawali Railway Station,
Rairu, Dist.
Gwalior-474 010
248. Indore Mid
Indian Overseas Bank
Corporate, 2639
Scheme No.54,
Shree Satya Sai Vidya Vihar
Compound,
Bombay Hospital Road,
Vijay Nagar, Indore - 452 010
249. Datia, 2640
Indian Overseas Bank
H. No. 99/2,
In front of Nagar Palika Bhawan,
Datia - 475 661
250. Gwalior -
Indian Overseas Bank
Thatipur, 2655
H. No. 88, Mayur,
Saket, Thatipur - 474 011,
Distt. Gwalior
251. Bhind, 2656
Indian Overseas Bank
H. No. 363, Ward No.12,
Gwalior Main Road,
Bhind - 477 001, Distt.Bhind
252. Rewa, 2872
Indian Overseas Bank
NH-7, Near Bus Stand,
beside Aditya Hotel,
Rewa - 486 001
253. Balaghat, 2873
Indian Overseas Bank
Ward No.15,
Main Road, Balaghat - 481 001,
Distt. Balaghat
254. Chattarpur, 2954 Indian Overseas Bank
Plot No. 243, 24 Jawahar Marg,
Chattarpur - 471 001,
Distt. Chattarpur
255. Guna, 2956
Indian Overseas Bank
Plot No. 96, Main Road,
Guna - 473 001, Distt. Guna
256. Jauri, 2958
Indian Overseas Bank
In front of Beej Bhandar,
Jaura Road, Jauri - 476 001,
Distt. Morena
257. Mandsaur, 2957
Indian Overseas Bank
65/1, DRP Line,
Mau Neemach Road,
Mandsaur - 458 001
258. Neemach, 2936
Indian Overseas Bank
20, Scheme No.1,
Town Hall Road,
Neemach - 458441,
Dist. Neemach
259. Purani Chawni,
Indian Overseas Bank
2953
Survey No.882,
Near Tata Mobile Tower,
Purani Chawni - 474 101,
Dist. Gwalior
260. Seoni, 2959
Indian Overseas Bank
436, Near Mahavir Madhiya,
GN Road, Mangalipeth,
Ajad Ward, Seoni - 480 661,
Dist. Seoni
261. Purasani, 3132
Indian Overseas Bank
H. No. 3733, A Block,
Sithauli Road,
Near Railway Station,
In front of Railway Spring
Factory, Vill. Purasani,
Post - ITM College - 474001,
Dist. Gwalior
262. Nainod, 3131
Indian Overseas Bank
Plot No.139, Gandhinagar,
Vill. Nainod - 453112,
Dist. Indore
(1)
(2)
(3)
(1)
(2)
(3)
6170
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
263. Bhawrasala, 3130 Indian Overseas Bank
Plot No.40, 41, Shakanbari,
Avenue Colony,
Post. Shri Arbindo S A ,
Vill - 453555, Dist. Indore
264. Pipliya
Indian Overseas Bank
Bajkhan, 3133
Plot No.7 & 8,
Pipaliya Bajkhan Road,
Bhanpur - 462010,
Dist. Bhopal
265. Satna, 3188
Indian Overseas Bank
Khasra No. 252,
Satna Building,
Rewa Road,
Satna - 485 001,
Dist. Satna
266. Virpur, 3189
Indian Overseas Bank
Imali Naka, Virpur, 474 001,
Gwalior
267. Borda, 3209
Indian Overseas Bank
Ultimate English Villa,
Mian Kolar Road,
Vill. Borda - 462042,
Dist. Bhopal
Raipur Region
268. Balod, 2534
Indian Overseas Bank
Near Old Bus Stand,
Sardar Line Balod,
PIN : 491226
Dist : Durg
269. Baikundpur, 2657 Indian Overseas Bank
Plot No 7, Ward No 8,
Main Road Baikunthpur,
PIN : 497335, Dist : Koriya
270. Samta Colony,
Indian Overseas Bank
2984
C-97, Samta Colony,
Raipur, PIN : 492001
Dist : Raipur
271. G E Road,
Indian Overseas Bank
Raipur, 2985
Sai Tower Near Azad Police
Station, Amapara Raipur,
PIN : 492001
Dist : Raipur
272. Hirri 3227
Indian Overseas Bank
At Hirri,
Near Bilha Moae,
PO - Hirri
PIN : 495222
Dist : Bilaspur
273. Ranchi Main,
Indian Overseas Bank
0366
Athmaram Bhavan,
M G Marg,
Radhesyam Lane Ranchi,
Pin : 834001
Dist : Ranchi
274. Jamshedpur,
Indian Overseas Bank
0424
10 Silver Cage Mall (I Floor)
Diagonal Road,
Bistupur Jamshedpur,
Pin : 831001
Dist : Paschimi Singhbhum
275. Bokaro Steel
Indian Overseas Bank
City, 1246
Purana Baz By Pass Road,
Chas PO Bokaro,
Pin : 827013 Dist : Bokaro
276. Dhanbad, 0593
Indian Overseas Bank
Bank More Katras Road,
Dhanbad Pin : 826001
Dist : Dhanbad
277. Bariatu Road,
Indian Overseas Bank
0672
Amrapali Building
Bariatu Road,
R M C H P.O. Ranchi,
Pin : 834008 Dist : Ranchi
278. Club Road, 1563 Indian Overseas Bank
Gossner College Gel Church
Complex, Main Road Ranchi,
Pin : 834001 Dist : Ranchi
279. Purulia
Indian Overseas Bank
Road, 1508
Gram Guru Education Centre,
Purulia Road, Ranchi,
Pin : 834001 Dist : Ranchi
280. Hazaribagh, 1486 Indian Overseas Bank
Remesh Complex,
Boddam Bazar, K.B. Marg,
Hazaribagh,
Pin : 825301
Dist : Hazaribag
281. Dakra, 0558
Indian Overseas Bank
Dakra Colliery,
Khelari P.O.
Dakra, Pin : 829210
Dist : Ranchi
282. Kanke Road,
Indian Overseas Bank
1639
Central Coal Fields,
Lt. Kanke Road,
Jawahar Nagar, Ranchi,
Pin : 834009
Dist : Ranchi
(1)
(2)
(3)
(1)
(2)
(3)
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6171
283. Mango, 1564
Indian Overseas Bank
Madhusudan Devendra Lok
Complex, Dimna Road,
Mango, Jamshedpur,
Pin : 831013
Dist : Purbi Singhbhum
284. Marar, 0454
Indian Overseas Bank
Ranchi Road, Marar,
Pin : 829117
Dist : Ramgarh
285. Baridih, 1511
Indian Overseas Bank
Mercy Hospital Baridih,
Jamshedpur
Pin : 831017
Dist : Purbi Singhbhum
286. Neori, 0783
Indian Overseas Bank
Vikas Vidyalaya Neori
Pin : 835217
Dist : Ranchi
287. Khunti, 1182
Indian Overseas Bank
Upper Chowk
Main Road
Khunti
Pin : 835210
Dist : Khunti
288. Deoghar, 1579
Indian Overseas Bank
I Floor L I C Buildings
Kutchery Road
Deoghar
Pin : 814112
Dist : Deoghar
289. Giridih, 0590
Indian Overseas Bank
Makatpur Bi Marg,
Giridih Pin : 815301
Dist- Giridih
290. Gumla, 1544
Indian Overseas Bank
Sharda Market Complex
Palkot Road,
Gumla Pin : 835207
Dist : Gumla
291. Sec IX, 1839
Indian Overseas Bank
Sector 9 A “B” Road,
Bokaro Steel City
Pin : 827009
Dist : Bokaro
292. Adityapur, 3003
Indian Overseas Bank
Holding No 1839 1st Floor
Tata Kendra, Main Road
Adityapur Pin : 832109
Dist : Saraikela Kharsawa
293. Daltonganj, 3021 Indian Overseas Bank
Suraj Nagar,
Belwatikar Chowk
(Medini Nagar), Daltonganj
P O Daltonganj
Pin : 822101 Dist : Palamau
294. Chakradharpur,
Indian Overseas Bank
3141
Old Ranchi Road
Rani Sati Enclave
Chakradarpur Pin : 833102
Dist : Paschimi Singhbhum
295. Dumardaga, 3152 Indian Overseas Bank
Ground Floor Rajasthali Enclave
P. S Sadar P.O. Neori
Vill - Dumardaga
Pin : 835217 Dist : Ranchi
296. Ormanjhi, 3170
Indian Overseas Bank
Mamta Market,
Thana Ormanjhi
Vill - Dardang (Ormanjhi)
P. O. Ormanjhi
Pin : 835219 Dist : Ranchi
297. Lalganj, 3321
Indian Overseas Bank
Beside Patanjali Arogyam
Khelgaon, P O - Sugnu
Lalganj
Pin : 835103 Dist : Ranchi
298. Allahabad, 0350
Indian Overseas Bank
61, M.G. Marg, Civil Lines,
Allahabad,
Pin-211001,
Distt : Allahabad
299. Varanasi, 0370
Indian Overseas Bank
C7-34, Lahurabir Main Crossing,
Varanasi, Pin-221001,
Distt : Varanasi
300. Gorakhpur, 0452
Indian Overseas Bank
Vijaya Chowk, Gorakhpur,
Pin : 273001,
Distt : Gorakhpur
301. Phulpur
Indian Overseas Bank
(Iffco Compex),
Ghiya Nagar, Allahabad,
0595
Jaunpur Road, Phulpur,
Pin : 212404,
Distt : Allahabad
302. Varanasi
Indian Overseas Bank
Cantonment,
52 & 53 Patel Nagar Colony,
1002
Near Mint House, Nadeshar,
Varanasi Cantonment,
Pin: 221002, Distt: Varanasi
(1)
(2)
(3)
(1)
(2)
(3)
6172
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
303. Manauri, 1523
Indian Overseas Bank
G T Road,
Off Airforce Station Gate,
Opp. Gurudwara, Manauri,
Pin : 212208, Allahabad
304. Azamagarh, 1604 Indian Overseas Bank
Rama Complex,
Pandit Deen Dayal Chowk,
Civil Line, Azamgarh,
Pin : 276001,
Distt : Allahabad
305. Mirzapur, 1618
Indian Overseas Bank
Brahmchari ka kuan,
Near Reserve Police Line,
VIP Road, Mirzapur,
Pin : 231001,
Distt: Mirzapur
306. Fatima Hospital, Indian Overseas Bank
Gorakhpur,1906
New Bye-Pass Road,
Jungle Saligram,
Padri Bazaar, Gorakhpur,
Pin : 273001,
Distt – Gorakhpur
307. Glenhill School,
Indian Overseas Bank
Varanasi, 1968
Glenhill School, Manduadih,
Pin: 221103, Distt: Varanasi
308. St. Joseph
Indian Overseas Bank
School,
Civil Lines, Gorakhpur
Gorakhpur, 1972
Pin : 273009, Distt: Gorakhpur
309. Bank Road
Indian Overseas Bank
Branch, 2067
72, Bank Road, Gorakhpur,
Uttar Pradesh,
Pin : 273001, Distt : Gorakhpur
310. Barhalganj, 2104 Indian Overseas Bank
Main Market Road,
Barhalganj,
Pin: 273402,
Distt: Gorakhpur
311. Cobra Nursery
Indian Overseas Bank
School,
1, Kariyappa Road,
Allahabad, 2163
New Cantonment,
Sub-Area Headquarters,
Allahabad Pin: 211001
Distt: Allahabad
312. Reserve Police
Indian Overseas Bank
Line, Varanasi,
Reserve Police Line,
2164
Pandeypur Road,
Varanasi Cantonment
Varanasi Pin : 221002
Dist : Varanasi
313. Pratapgarh, 2362 Indian Overseas Bank
Chawla Arcade Bhangwa
Chungi Pratapgarh
Pin : 230001
Dist : Pratapgarh
314. Sultanpur -
Indian Overseas Bank
Civil Lines, 2386 1077/3 Civil Lines
Opp to Bus Stand Sultanpur
Pin : 228001
Dist : Sultanpur
315. Mau Aima, 2471
Indian Overseas Bank
171 Station Road,
Mau Aima,
Allahabad Pin : 212501
Dist : Allahabad
316. Chitrakootdham
Indian Overseas Bank
(Karvi), 2472
440/2 Dwaraka Puri,
Mandakini Road,
Opp Banda Division
Jalsanthan,
Purani Bazar
Pin : 210205
Dist : Chitrakoot
317. Patti, 2511
Indian Overseas Bank
H No 1 Ward No 2
Civil Lines Patti
Pin : 230135
Dist : Pratapgarh
318. Mahewa
Indian Overseas Bank
Patti, 2556
46-B Opp Police Post
Mahewa Chowk, Naini
Allahabad
Pin : 211007
Dist : Allahabad
319. Maharajganj,
Indian Overseas Bank
2557
Plot No 2034,
Ward No 16,
Opp Kotwali Pharenda Rd
Hamid Nagar,
Nagar Palika Parishad
Maharajganj
Pin : 273303
Dist : Maharajganj
320. Chandauli, 2572
Indian Overseas Bank
Plot No 453
Beside Rama Shankar Singh
Hospital,
Chandausli,
Pin : 232104
Dist : Chandauli
(1)
(2)
(3)
(1)
(2)
(3)
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6173
321. Mukhalsarai,
Indian Overseas Bank
2859
House No 581 G T Road
Nai Basti Mughalsarai
Pin : 232101
Dist : Lucknow
322. Ghazipur, 2860
Indian Overseas Bank
136 Saklenabad
Opp Jail Gate
Ghazipur
Pin : 233001
Dist : Ghazipur
323. Bhadohi, 2983
Indian Overseas Bank
102 Station Road,
Mallu Talab Bhadohi
Pin : 221401
Dist : Sant Ravidas Nagar
324. Basti, 3014
Indian Overseas Bank
H No 680-A Prahlad Colony,
Civil Lines Basti
Pin : 272001
Dist : Basti
325. Jaunpur, 3015
Indian Overseas Bank
H No 21-A Prabhu Complex,
Husainabad Jaycee Chauraha,
Jaunpur
Pin : 222001
Dist : Jaunpur
326. Bhikhipur, 3079
Indian Overseas Bank
16 KHA Sharma Towers,
Bhikhipur, P. O. Mirazamurad,
Pin : 221307 Dist : Varanasi
327. Anpara, 3123
Indian Overseas Bank
234/4 Anpara Bazar
Cinema Road
Anpara P O
Pin : 231225
Dist : Sonbhadra
328. Robertsganj,
Indian Overseas Bank
3124
Plot No 337 Devdep Complex,
Near Chandi Tiraha,
Robertsgunj,
Pin : 231216
Dist : Sonbhadra
329. Khalilabad, 3326 Indian Overseas Bank
H No 136
Ward 24 Gola Bazar North
Near Nehru Chowk Khalilabad
Pin : 272175
Dist : Sant Kabir Nagar
(jktLo foHkkx)
(osQUnzh; izR;{k dj cksMZ)
ubZ fnYYkh] 26 vxLr] 2014
(la- 36@2014)
dk-vk-
2434.—loZlk/kj.k dh tkudkjh ds fy,
,rn~}kjk ;g vf/lwfpr fd;k tkrk gS fd dsUnz ljdkj }kjk vk;dj
fu;ekoyh] 1962 (mDr fu;ekoyh) ds fu;e 5x vkSj 5?k ds
lkFk ifBr vk;dj vf/fu;e] 1961 (mDr vf/fu;e) dh /kjk
3 dh mi&/kjk (1) ds [kaM (iii) ds iz;kstukFkZ chjcy lkguh
baLVhV~;wV vkWiQ isfy;ksckWVuh] y[kumQ] (iSu&,,,Vhch6882,p)
laxBu dks dj fu/kZj.k o"kZ 2014&15 ls vkxs fuEufyf[kr 'krks± ds
v/hu ^oSKkfud vuqla/ku laLFkk* dk;Zdykiksa dh Js.kh esa vuqeksfnr
fd;k x;k gS] uker%µ
(i)
vuqeksfnr ^oSKkfud vuqla/ku laLFkk* dk eq[; mís'; oSKkfud
vuqla/ku djuk gksxk_
(ii) vuqeksfnr laxBu oSKkfud vuqla/ku Lo;a djsxk_
(iii) vuqeksfnr laxBu oSKkfud vuqla/ku ds fy, bldks izkIr
jkf'k ds laca/ esa i`Fkd ys[kk cgh j[ksxk] ftlesa vuqla/ku
djus ds fy, iz;qDr jkf'k n'kkZbZ xbZ gks] mDr vf/fu;e dh
/kjk 288 dh mi&/kjk (2) ds Li"Vhdj.k esa ;Fkk&ifjHkkf"kr
fdlh ys[kkdkj ls vius [kkrk&cgh dh ys[kk&ijh{kk djk,xk
vkSj mDr vf/fu;e dh /kjk 139 dh mi&/kjk (1) ds
varxZr vk; dh fooj.kh izLrqr djus dh fu;e frfFk rd
,sls ys[kkdkj }kjk fof/or lR;kfir ,oa gLrk{kfjr ys[kk
ijh{kk fjiksVZ bl ekeys esa {ks=kkf/dkj j[kus okys vk;dj
vk;qDr vFkok vk;dj funs'kd dks izLrqr djsxk_
(iv) vuqeksfnr laxBu izkIr nku vkSj lkekftd foKku esa vuqlaèkku
ds fy, iz;qDr jkf'k dk vyx fooj.k j[ksxk vkSj mi;qZDr
ys[kk&ijh{kk fjiksVZ ds lkFk ys[kk&ijh{kd }kjk fof/or
lR;kfir ,sls fooj.k dh izfrfyfi izLrqr djsxk A
2-
dsanz ljdkj ;g vuqeksnu okil ys ysxh ;fn vuqeksfnr
laxBu %µ
(d) iSjkxzkiQ 1 ds mi&iSjkxzkiQ (iii) esa mfYyf[kr i`Fkd ys[kk
cgh j[kus esa vliQy jgrk gS_ vFkok
([k) iSjkxzkiQ 1 ds mi&iSjkxzkiQ (iii) esa mfYyf[kr viuh ys[kk&
ijh{kk fjiksVZ izLrqr djus esa vliQy jgrk gS_ vFkok
(x) iSjkxzkiQ 1 ds mi&iSjkxzkiQ (iv) esa mfYyf[kr lkekftd
foKku ,oa lkaf[;dh vuqla/ku ds fy, izkIr ,oa iz;qDr nku
dk viuk fooj.k izLrqr djus esa vliQy jgrk gS_ vFkok
(?k) viuk vuqla/ku dk;Z djuk can dj nsrk gS vFkok blds
vuqla/ku dk;Z dks okLrfod ugha ik;k tkrk gS_ vFkok
(Ä) mDr fu;ekoyh ds fu;e 5x vkSj 5?k ds lkFk ifBr mDr
vf/fu;e dh /kjk 35 dh mi&/kjk (1) ds [kaM (iii) ds
mica/ksa ds vuq:i ugha gksrk vkSj mudk ikyu ugha fd;k
tkrk A
¹iQk- la- 203@30@2013@vkdfu&IIº
Ípk jLrksxh] voj lfpo (vkdfu&II)
(1)
(2)
(3)
6174
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(Department of Revenue)
(Central Board of Direct Taxes)
New Delhi, 26th August, 2014
(No. 36/2014)
S.O.
2434.—It is hereby notified for general
information that the organization Birbal Sahni Institute of
Palaeobotany, Lucknow (PAN-AAATB6882H) has been
approved by the Central Government for the purpose of
clause (iii) of sub-section (1) of section 35 of the Income-
tax Act, 1961 (said Act), read with Rules 5C and 5D of the
Income-tax Rules, 1962 (said Rules), from Assessment year
2014-2015 onwards in the category of ‘Scientific Research
Association’ activities subject to the following conditions,
namely :—
(i)
The sole objective of the approved ‘Scientific
research association’ shall be undertake scientific research;
(ii)
The approved organization shall carry out scientific
research by itself;
(iii)
The approved organization shall maintain separate
books of accounts in respect of the sums received by it for
scientific research, reflect therein the amounts used for
carrying out research, get such books audited by an
accountant as defined in the explanation to sub-section (2)
of section 288 of the said Act and furnish the report of
such audit duly signed and verified by such accountant to
the Commissioner of Income-tax or the Director of Income-
tax having jurisdiction over the case, by the due date of
furnishing the return of income under sub-section (1) of
section 139 of the said Act;
(iv)
The approved organization shall maintain a separate
statement of donations received and amounts applied for
scientific research in social science and a copy of such
statement duly certified by the auditor shall accompany
the report of audit referred to above.
2.
The Central Government shall withdraw the approval
if the approved organization :—
a.
fails to amintain separate books of accounts referred
to in sub-paragraph (iii) of paragraph 1; or
b.
fails to furnish its audit report referred to in sub-
paragraph (iii) of paragraph 1; or
c.
fails to furnish its statement of the donations received
and sums applied for research in social science or
statistical research referred to in sub-paragraph (iv)
of paragraph 1; or
d.
ceases to carry on its research activities or its
research activities are not found to be genuine; or
e.
ceases to conform to and comply with the provisions
of clause (iii) of sub-section (1) of section 35 of the
said Act read with rules 5C and 5D of the said Rules.
[F. No. 203/30/2013/ITA-II]
RICHA RASTOGI, Under Secy. (ITA-II)
ubZ fnYYkh] 3 flrEcj] 2014
dk-vk-
2435.—ljdkjh LFkku (vuf/Ñr vf/Hkksfx;ksa
dh csn[kyh) vf/fu;e] 1971 (1971 dk 40) dh /kjk 3 }kjk
iznÙk 'kfDr;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq,] dsUnzh; ljdkj] ,rn~}kjk]
fuEufyf[kr lkj.kh ds dkye (2) esa mfYyf[kr vf/dkfj;ksa dks
mDr vfèkfu;e ds iz;kstu ds fy, lEink vf/dkjh fu;qDr djrh
gS vkSj vkxs ;g funs'k nsrh gS fd mDr vf/dkjh mDr vf/fu;e
}kjk ;k mlds varxZr lEink vf/dkjh dks iznÙk 'kfDr;ksa vkSj vf/
jksfir drZO;ksa dk v/ksfyf[kr lkj.kh ds dkye (3) esa ;Fkk
fofu£n"V {ks=k ds varxZr vkus okys ljdkjh LFkkuksa ds laca/ esa]
vius {ks=kkf/dkj dh LFkkuh; lhek ds Hkhrj iz;ksx djsaxs %µ
Ø-la- vf/dkjh dk inuke
lkoZtfud ifjljksa dk oxhZ&
dj.k vkSj {ks=kkf/dkj ds
fu;a=k.k dh LFkkuh; lhek
(1)
(2)
(3)
1-
eaMy dk;kZy; gSnjkckn
rsyaxkuk vkSj fleka/jk jkT;
ds ofj"Bre lgk;d
esa fLFkr eaMy dk;kZy;]
egkizcU/d]
gSnjkckn ds iz'kklfud
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
fu;a=k.k ds v/hu jkT;ksa ds
6&1&73] ydM+h dk iqy]
uhps fn, x, orZeku 23 ftys
lSiQkckn] gSnjkckn&500004
'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks
iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ
iwoZ xksnkojh ftyk
xaVwj
fpÙkwj
gSnjkckn
dMqik
djhe uxj
Ñ".kk
oqQjuwy
egcwcuxj
vuariqj
uyxksUMk
usYyksj
futkekckn
izdkle
jaxk jsîóh
JhdkoqQye
fo'kk[kkiêðue
fot;uxje
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6175
njHkaxk
[kxfj;k
e/siqjk
4-
eaMy dk;kZy;] iVuk
eaMy dk;kZy;] iVuk ds
ds ofj"Bre lgk;d
iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu
egkizcU/d]
ftlesa fcgkj jkT; ds uhps
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
fn, x, orZeku 1 ftyk
vkj CykWd] pk.kD; Vkoj]
'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks
iVuk 842001
iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ
iVuk
5-
eaMy dk;kZy;] vkjk
eaMy dk;kZy;] vkjk ds
ds ofj"Bre lgk;d
iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu
egkizcU/d]
ftlesa fcgkj jkT; ds uhps
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
fn, x, orZeku 4 ftys
vkjk gksVy fjxy
'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks
dkEiysDl] f}rh; ry]
iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
iwohZ jeUuk jksM vkjk
gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
(fcgkj)
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ
dSewj
Hkkstiqj
cDlj
jksgrkl
6-
eaMy dk;kZy; fcgkj'kjhiQ
eaMy dk;kZy;] fcgkj'kjhiQ ds
ds ofj"Bre lgk;d
iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu
egkizcU/d]
ftlesa fcgkj jkT; ds uhps
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
fn, x, orZeku 8 ftys
jkepUnziqj]
'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks
fcgkj'kjhiQ&803101
iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ
y[khljk;
ukyank
uoknk
teqbZ
'ks[kiqjk
Hkkxyiqj
eqaxsj
ckadk
okjaxy
if'peh xksnkojh ftyk
esMd
[kEeke
vfnykckn
2- eaMy dk;kZy; eqtÝiQjiqj
eaMy dk;kZy;] eqtÝiQjiqj
ds ofj"Bre lgk;d
ds iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds
egkizcU/d]
v/hu ftlesa fcgkj jkT; ds
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
uhps fn, x, orZeku 9 ftys
vxgksfj;k cktkj
'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks
eqtÝiQjiqj&842002
iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ
eqtÝiQjiqj
lhrke<+h
floku
xksikyxat
iwohZ pEikju
if'peh pEikju
lkj.k
oS'kkyh
f'kogj
3- eaMy dk;kZy; njHkaxk
eaMy dk;kZy;] njHkaxk ds
ds ofj"Bre lgk;d
iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu
egkizcU/d]
ftlesa fcgkj jkT; ds uhps
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
fn, x, orZeku 12 ftys
njHkaxk] de£'k;y gkml]
'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks
ygsfj;k ljk;]
iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
njHkaxk&846001
gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ
e/qcuh
leLrhiqj
csxqljk;
lgjlk
lqikSy
vjfj;k
iq£.k;k
dfVgkj
fd'kuxat
(1)
(2)
(3)
(1)
(2)
(3)
6176
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
7- eaMy dk;kZy; x;k
eaMy dk;kZy;] x;k ds
ds ofj"Bre lgk;d
iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu
egkizcU/d]
ftlesa fcgkj jkT; ds uhps
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
fn, x, orZeku 4 ftys
x;k 400 ,ih dkWyksuh]
'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks
x;k&823001
iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ
x;k
vkSjaxkckn
tgkukckn
vjoy
8- eaMy dk;kZy;] jk;iqj
eaMy dk;kZy;] jk;iqj ds
ds ofj"Bre lgk;d
iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu
egkizcU/d]
ftlesa NÙkhlx<+ jkT; ds uhps
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
fn, x, orZeku 27 ftys
enhuk eafty dpsjh
'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks
pkSd] jk;iqj]
iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
NÙkhlx<+
gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ
cLrj
fcykliqj
/erkjh
nqxZ
tatfxj&pEik
dksjck
dksfj;k
egkleqan
jk;x<+
jk;iqj
jktuan xkao
narsokM+k
t'kiqj
do/kZ
ckyksn
ukyksnk cktkj
cyjkeiqj
fcfe=kk
fctkiqj
xfj;kcan
dudsj
dksaMk xkao
eqaxsyh
ujk;.kiqj
ljxqtk
lqdek
lwjtiqj
9-
eaMy dk;kZy;] mÙkjh
eaMy dk;kZy;] mÙkjh fnYyh ds
fnYyh ds ofj"Bre
iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu
lgk;d egkizcU/d]
ftlesa fnYyh jkT; ds uhps
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
fn, x, orZeku 4 ftys
jktsUnz Hkou] jktsUnz
'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks
Iysl] ubZ fnYyh
iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ
iwohZ fnYyh
mÙkj iwoZ fnYyh
mÙkjh fnYyh
mÙkjh if'peh fnYyh
if'peh fnYyh
lSUVªy fnYyh
10- eaMy dk;kZy;] vgenkckn
eaMy dk;kZy;] vgenkckn ds
ds ofj"Bre lgk;d
iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu
egkizcU/d]
ftlesa xqtjkr jkT; ds uhps
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
fn, x, orZeku 14 ftys
xqtjkr Hkou] vgenkckn]
'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks
,e ts ykbczsjh ds lkeus]
iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
,ykbl iqy] vkJe jksM]
gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
vgenkckn&380006
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ
vgenkckn
vejsyh
Hkkouxj
cukldaBk
xka/huxj
tkeuxj
twukx<+
dPN
esglk.kk
(1)
(2)
(3)
(1)
(2)
(3)
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6177
ikVu
iksjcanj
jktdksV
lkcjdaBk
lqjsUnz uxj
eksjch
y{;}hi (la?k 'kkflr)
11- eaMy dk;kZy; p.Mhx<+
eaMy dk;kZy;] paMhx<+ ds
ds ofj"Bre lgk;d
iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu
egkizcU/d]
ftlesa gfj;k.kk jkT; ds uhps
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
fn, x, orZeku 3 ftys
ih,uch gkml]
'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks
lsDVj 17&ch]
iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
paMhx<+&160017
gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ
paMhx<+ (la?k 'kkflr)
iapowQyk (gfj;k.kk)
vEckyk (gfj;k.kk)
12- eaMy dk;kZy; fglkj
eaMy dk;kZy;] fglkj ds
ds ofj"Bre lgk;d
iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu
egkizcU/d]
ftlesa gfj;k.kk jkT; ds uhps
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
fn, x, orZeku 3 ftys
fglkj] vkbZvkbZVh ds
'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks
lkeus] Mkcj pkSd]
iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
fglkj&125005
gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ
fglkj
fljlk
iQrsgkckn
13- eaMy dk;kZy; djuky
eaMy dk;kZy;] djuky ds
ds ofj"Bre lgk;d
iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu
egkizcU/d]
ftlesa gfj;k.kk jkT; ds uhps
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
fn, x, orZeku 3 ftys
cs&21&22] lsDVj&12]
'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks
gqM~Mk] djuky&132001
iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ
djuky
ikuhir
lksuhir
14- eaMy dk;kZy; jksgrd
eaMy dk;kZy;] jksgrd ds
ds ofj"Bre lgk;d
iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu
egkizcU/d]
ftlesa gfj;k.kk jkT; ds uhps
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
fn, x, orZeku 5 ftys
jksgrd] jke xksiky]
'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks
dkyksuh] lksuhir jksM]
iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
jksgrd&124001
gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ
jksgrd
>Ttj
jsokM+h
egsUnzx<+
fHkokuh
15- eaMy dk;kZy; f'keyk
eaMy dk;kZy;] f'keyk ds
ds ofj"Bre lgk;d
iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu
egkizcU/d]
ftlesa fgekpy izns'k jkT; ds
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
uhps fn, x, orZeku 4 ftys
f'keyk fjtsaV gkml]
'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks
fn eky] f'keyk&171001
iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ
dUuwj
f'keyk
fljekSj
lksyu
16- eaMy dk;kZy; /eZ'kkyk
eaMy dk;kZy;] /eZ'kkyk ds
ds ofj"Bre lgk;d
iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu
egkizcU/d]
ftlesa fgekpy izns'k jkT; ds
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
uhps fn, x, orZeku 2 ftys
dpgjh jksM] thihvks ds
'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks
ikl] /eZ'kkyk&176215
iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ
dkaxM+k
pEck
17- eaMy dk;kZy; gehjiqj
eaMy dk;kZy;] gehjiqj ds
ds ofj"Bre lgk;d
iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu
egkizcU/d]
ftlesa fgekpy izns'k jkT; ds
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
uhps fn, x, orZeku 3 ftys
gehjiqj] U;w jksM]
'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks
(1)
(2)
(3)
(1)
(2)
(3)
6178
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
gehjiqj 177001
iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ
gehjiqj
muk
fcykliqj
18- eaMy dk;kZy; e.Mh
eaMy dk;kZy;] e.Mh ds
ds ofj"Bre lgk;d
iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu
egkizcU/d]
ftlesa fgekpy izns'k jkT; ds
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
uhps fn, x, orZeku 3 ftys
e.Mh] ty jksM]
'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks
cVkyk pkSd]
iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
eaMh 175 001
gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ
e.Mh
oqQYyq
dsyk¡x
19- eaMy dk;kZy; tEew
eaMy dk;kZy;] tEew ds
ds ofj"Bre lgk;d
iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu
egkizcU/d]
ftlesa tEew ,oa d'ehj jkT;
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
ds uhps fn, x, orZeku 21
gkbySaM Vkoj]
ftys 'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj
jsy gsM dkEIySDl]
tks iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
tEew 180012
gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ
tEew
dBqvk
lack
iw¡p
jktkSjh
MksMk
js;klh
jkecu
m/eiqj
Jhuxj
vuarukx
dkjfxy
iqyokek
cMxke
ckjkewyk
oqQiokM+k
ysg
xaMsjcy
ckaMhiksjk
fd'rokj
lksisu
20- eaMy dk;kZy; jkaph
eaMy dk;kZy;] jkaph ds
ds ofj"Bre lgk;d
iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu
egkizcU/d]
ftlesa >kj[kaM jkT; ds uhps
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
fn, x, orZeku 24 ftys
cxjk; ekdsZV] esu jksM]
'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks
jk¡ph 834001
iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
(>kj[kaM)
gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ
jk¡ph
iwohZ ¯lgHkwe
if'peh ¯lgHkwe
ljk;dsyk
cksdkjks
/uckn
iykew
ykrsgkj
x<+ok
fxjhMhg
gtkjhckx
prjk
yksgjMkxk
xksM~Mk
nso?kj
nqedk
xqeyk
tkerkjk
[kqUrh
dksMjek
ikoqQj
jkex<+
lkgscxat
fleMsxk
(1)
(2)
(3)
(1)
(2)
(3)
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6179
21- eaMy dk;kZy;] caxykSj
eaMy dk;kZy;] caxykSj ds
ds ofj"Bre lgk;d
iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu
egkizcU/d]
ftlesa dukZVd jkT; ds uhps
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
fn, x, orZeku 30 ftys
26&27] ,eth jksM]
'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks
jgstk VkWoj]
iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
caxykSj&560001
gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ
cxykSj
jkeuxjk
csyxk¡o
fcnj
chtkiqj
nf{k.k dUuM+
/kM+okM+
nokafxjh
xMkx
xqycxkZ
gklu
dksykj
ekaM;k
eSlwj
mÙkjh dUuM+
f'keksxk
rqeoqQj
mMhih
csYykjh
ckxy dksV
caxykSj xzkeh.k
pejktkuxj
fpdeaxyqj
fpdcYykiqj
fp=knqxkZ
gkosjh
dksMkxw
dksIiy
jk;pwj
;knkfxjh
22- eaMy dk;kZy;] dksftdksM
eaMy dk;kZy;] dksftdksM ds
ds ofj"Bre lgk;d
iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu
egkizcU/d]
ftlesa dsjyk jkT; ds uhps
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
fn, x, orZeku 6 ftys
'krkCnh Hkou] feuh
'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks
ckbZikl jksM] ihvks]
iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
,, xkfoUniqje]
gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
dksftdksM&673016
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ
dUuwj
dlkjxkWM
dksftdksM
ekykiqje
iykDdM
ok;ukM
23- eaMy dk;kZy;] Hkksiky
eaMy dk;kZy;] Hkksiky ds
ds ofj"Bre lgk;d
iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu
egkizcU/d]
ftlesa eè;izns'k jkT; ds uhps
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
fn, x, orZeku 12 ftys
ih,uch gkmQl]
'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks
vfjjk fgYl]
iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
Hkksiky&4622001
gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ
csrqy
Hkksiky
nfr;k
gkS'kaxkckn
gjnk
flgksj
fofn'kk
Xokfy;j
eksjsuk
f'koiqj
jk;lsu
¯HkM
24-
eaMy dk;kZy;] bankSj
eaMy dk;kZy;] bankSj ds
ds ofj"Bre lgk;d
iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu
egkizcU/d]
ftlesa eè;izns'k jkT; ds uhps
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
fn, x, orZeku 19 ftys
bankSj] 20] Lusg uxj]
'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks
bankSj&452001
iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
(1)
(2)
(3)
(1)
(2)
(3)
6180
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ
bankSj
c/okuh
[kjxkSu
eanlkSj
uhep
jk;x<+
xquk
v'kksd uxj
[akMok
cqjgkuiqj
jryke
'kktkiqj
f'koiqjh
mTtSu
nsokl
/kj
>kcqvk
vxj
vfyjktiqj
25- eaMy dk;kZy;] tcyiqj
eaMy dk;kZy;] tcyiqj ds
ds ofj"Bre lgk;d
iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu
egkizcU/d]
ftlesa eè;izns'k jkT; ds uhps
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
fn, x, orZeku 20 ftys
tcyiqj] 1227]
'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks
usfi;j Vkmu]
iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
tcyiqj&482001
gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ
ckyk?kkV
Nrjiqj
¯NnokM+k
¯MMksj
neksg
tcyiqj
dVuh
eaMyk
uj¯lgiqj
jhok
flouh
lkxj
lruk
fl/h
¯lxjkSyh
vuqiiqj
iUuk
'kkgMksy
fVdex`g
mefj;k
26- eaMy dk;kZy;] eqEcbZ
eaMy dk;kZy;] eqEcbZ ds
ds ofj"Bre lgk;d
iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu
egkizcU/d]
ftlesa egkjk"Vª jkT; ds uhps
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
fn, x, orZeku 3 ftys
eqEcbZ] IykWV la[;k
'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks
lh&9] th CykWd
iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
ckanzk oqQykZ dkEiysDl
gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
ckanzk (iwoZ)] eqEcbZ
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
egkjk"Vª
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ
eqEcbZ
eqEcbZ miuxj
Fkk.ks
jk;x<
27- eaMy dk;kZy;] ukxiqj
eaMy dk;kZy;] ukxiqj ds
ds ofj"Bre lgk;d
iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu
egkizcU/d]
ftlesa egkjk"Vª jkT; ds uhps
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
fn, x, orZeku 16 ftys
ih,uch gkml] ¯dXlos]
'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks
ukxiqj&440001
iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ+
vdksyk
vejkorh
cqy<+kuk
pUnziqj
xksafn;k
tyxk¡o
ukxiqj
ukansM+
o/kZ
(1)
(2)
(3)
(1)
(2)
(3)
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6181
;oreky
ykrwj
ijHk.kh
HkaMkjk
x<fpjkSyh
¯gxksyh
okf'ke
28- eaMy dk;kZy;] iq.ks
eaMy dk;kZy;] iq.ks ds
ds ofj"Bre lgk;d
iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu
egkizcU/d]
ftlesa egkjk"Vª jkT; ds uhps
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
fn, x, orZeku 17 ftys
vjksM+k VkolZ es”kukbu
'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks
Ýyksj] 9 esykMkbu jksM]
iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
iq.ks dSEi] iq.ks&411001
gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ
iq.ks
vgenuxj
vkSjaxkckn
/qfy;k
dksYgkiqj
ukfld
lkaxyh
lksykiqj
jRukfxjh
¯l/qnqxZ
lrkjk
uanqjcj
chM
mLekukckn
tkyuk
mÙkjh xksok
nf{k.kh xksok
29- eaMy dk;kZy; xqokgkVh
eaMy dk;kZy;] xqokgkVh ds
ds ofj"Bre lgk;d
iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu
egkizcU/d]
ftlesa vle] v:.kkpy
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
izns'k] es?kky;] ef.kiqj]
uhyfxjh esU'ku] a
f=kiqjk] ukxkySaM] fetksje
Hkaxk/j] th ,l jksM]
jkT;ksa ds uhps fn, x, orZeku
xqokgkVh
82 ftys 'kkfey gSa] esa os
ifjlj tks iatkc us'kuy cSad
ds vius gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy
cSad }kjk vFkok iatkc
us'kuy cSad dh vksj ls iêsð
ij fy, x, gSa %µ
ckjisVk (vle)
cksaxkbZxkao (vle)
dNkj (vle)
fMc#x<+ (vle)
xksys?kkV (vle)
tksjgkV (vle)
dke#i (vle)
djhexat (vle)
uyokM+h (vle)
ukxkao (vle)
frulqf[k;k (vle)
lksfuriqj (vle)
ckWDlk (vle)
fpjkax (vle)
eksjhxk¡o (vle)
/qcjh (vle)
f/ekth (vle)
gykdkaMh (vle)
xksyikM+k (vle)
mnyfxjh (vle)
nkjax (vle)
flclkxj (vle)
dke#i&egkuxjh; (vle)
dkchZ vaxyksax (vle)
dksdjk>kM+ (vle)
y[kheiqj (vle)
vatko (v#.kkpy izns'k)
paxySaM (v#.kkpy izns'k)
fnokax ?kkVh (v#.kkpy izns'k)
iwohZ dkesax (v#.kkpy izns'k)
iwohZ fl;kax (v#.kkpy izns'k)
dqdx dqes (v#.kkpy izns'k)
yksfgr (v#.kkpy izns'k)
yksvj fnckax ?kkVh
(v#.kkpy izns'k)
ikiqeijs (v#.kkpy izns'k)
(1)
(2)
(3)
(1)
(2)
(3)
6182
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
raokx (v#.kkpy izns'k)
frji (v#.kkpy izns'k)
mQijh fl;kax
(v#.kkpy izns'k)
mQijh lqcu fljh
(v#.kkpy izns'k)
if'peh d¯ex
(v#.kkpy izns'k)
if'peh fl;kax
(v#.kkpy izns'k)
fo".kqiqj (euhiqj)
pansy (euhiqj)
bEiQky iwoZ (euhiqj)
bEiQky if'pe (euhiqj)
lsukifr (euhiqj)
rseaxyksax (euhiqj)
FkkmQcy (euhiqj)
mQjc#y (euhiqj)
iwohZ xkjksfgYl (es?kky;)
iwohZ [kklh fgYl (es?kky;)
tSafr;k fgYl (es?kky;)
fjcgksbZ (es?kky;)
nf{k.k xksjks fgYl (es?kky;)
if'pe xkjks fgYl (es?kky;)
if'pe [kklh fgYl (es?kky;)
vkbtksy (fetksje)
pEikbZ (fetksje)
dksykflc (fetksje)
yqxysbZ (fetksje)
yokax rykbZ (fetksje)
ekfer (fetksje)
lkbgk (fetksje)
lkjfPpi (fetksje)
fnekiqj (ukxkySaM)
tqusg chrks (ukxkySaM)
dSiQjh (ukxkySaM)
dksfg;k (ukxkySaM)
yksaxysax (ukxkySaM)
eksdkd paqx (ukxkySaM)
eksu (ukxkySaM)
isjsu (ukxkySaM)
isQd (ukxkySaM)
rq,u lkax (ukxkySaM)
oksdk (ukxkySaM)
/ykbZ (f=kiqjk)
mÙkjh (f=kiqjk)
nf{k.kh (f=kiqjk)
if'peh (f=kiqjk)
30- eaMy dk;kZy;] Hkqous'oj
eaMy dk;kZy;] Hkqous'oj ds
ds ofj"Bre lgk;d
iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu
egkizcU/d]
ftlesa mM+hlk jkT; ds uhps
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
fn, x, orZeku 12 ftys
pkSFkh eafty] nhun;ky
'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks
Hkou] v'kksd uxj]
iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
tuiFk] Hkqous'oj]
gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
mM+hlk&751009
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ
ckyklksj
Hknzd
dVd
/suduky
xtifr
xate
tktiqj
txr ¯lxiqj
[kqnkZ
u;kx<+
iqjh
dsUnzikjk
31- eaMy dk;kZy;] ve`rlj
eaMy dk;kZy;] ve`rlj ds
ds ofj"Bre lgk;d
iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu
egkizcU/d]
ftlesa iatkc jkT; ds uhps
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
fn, x, orZeku 2 ftys
f}rh; ry eSd yksM jksM
'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks
lsaV izQkafll LowQy ds lkeus]
iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
ve`rlj&143001
gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ
ve`rlj
rjurkj.k
(1)
(2)
(3)
(1)
(2)
(3)
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6183
32 eaMy dk;kZy;] gksf'k;kjiqj
eaMy dk;kZy;] gksf'k;kjiqj ds
ds ofj"Bre lgk;d
iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu
egkizcU/d]
ftlesa iatkc jkT; ds uhps
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
fn, x, orZeku 2 ftys
bEizwoesaV VªLV jksM]
'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks
gksf'k;kjiqj&146001
iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ
gksf'k;kjiqj
uoka'kgj
33- eaMy dk;kZy;] tkya/j
eaMy dk;kZy;] tkya/j ds
ds ofj"Bre lgk;d
iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu
egkizcU/d]
ftlesa iatkc jkT; ds uhps
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
fn, x, orZeku 1 ftyk
tkya/j] flfoy ykbUl]
'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks
tkya/j&144004
iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ
tkya/j
34- eaMy dk;kZy; HkfVUMk
eaMy dk;kZy;] HkfVUMk ds
ds ofj"Bre lgk;d
iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu
egkizcU/d]
ftlesa iatkc jkT; ds uhps
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
fn, x, orZeku 6 ftys
HkfVUMk] ,llhvks&29&31]
'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks
ekWMy VkmQu] isQt&1]
iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
isQ¯lx Vh oh VkWoj]
gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
HkfVUMk&151001
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ
HkfVUMk
cjukyk
iQftYdk
iQjhndksV
eqDrlj
35- eaMy dk;kZy; yqf/;kuk
eaMy dk;kZy;] yqf/;kuk ds
ds ofj"Bre lgk;d
iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu
egkizcU/d]
ftlesa iatkc jkT; ds uhps
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
fn, x, orZeku 2 ftys
lkbZV ua- 5] fiQjkstiqj
'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks
i[kksoy jksM]
iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
yqf/;kuk&141001
gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ
yqf/;kuk
eksaxk
36- eaMy dk;kZy; t;iqj
eaMy dk;kZy;] t;iqj ds
ds ofj"Bre lgk;d
iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu
egkizcU/d]
ftlesa jktLFkku jkT; ds uhps
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
fn, x, orZeku 7 ftys
ih ,u ch gkml] 2]
'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks
usg: Iysl] Vksad jksM]
iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
t;iqj&302015
gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ
t;iqj
nkSlk
Vksad
dksVk
cqanh
cjku
>kykokM
37- eaMy dk;kZy; Hkjriqj
eaMy dk;kZy;] Hkjriqj ds
ds ofj"Bre lgk;d
iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu
egkizcU/d]
ftlesa jktLFkku jkT; ds uhps
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
fn, x, orZeku 4 ftys
ih ,u ch gkml]
'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks
lqij cktkj]
iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
Hkjriqj&302001
gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ+
Hkjriqj
/kSyiqj
lokbZ ek/ksiqj
djkSyh
38- eaMy dk;kZy; tks/iqj
eaMy dk;kZy;] tks/iqj ds
ds ofj"Bre lgk;d
iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu
egkizcU/d]
ftlesa jktLFkku jkT; ds uhps
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
fn, x, orZeku 15 ftys
tks/iqj] 802] igyh
'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks
eafty] pksikfluh jksM]
iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
tks/iqj&302003
gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ
vtesj
ckalokM+k
ckM+esj
fHkyokM+k
fprkSM+x<+
(1)
(2)
(3)
(1)
(2)
(3)
6184
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
Mwaxjiqj
tSlyesj
tkykSj
tk/iqj
ukxkSj
ikyh
izrkix<+
jktleUn
fljksgh
mn;iqj
39- eaMy dk;kZy; Jhxaxkuxj
eaMy dk;kZy;] Jhxaxkuxj ds
ds ofj"Bre lgk;d
iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu
egkizcU/d]
ftlesa jktLFkku jkT; ds uhps
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
fn, x, orZeku 5 ftys
ih,uch gkml] ehjk ekxZ]
'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks
tokgj uxj]
iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
Jhxaxkuxj&335001
gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ
chdkusj
pq:
>qu>quw
guqekux<+
Jhxaxkuxj
40- eaMy dk;kZy; pSUubZ
eaMy dk;kZy;] pSUubZ ds
ds ofj"Bre lgk;d
iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu
egkizcU/d]
ftlesa rfeyukMq jkT; ds uhps
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
fn, x, orZeku 7 ftys
jkW;yk VkolZ] rhljh
'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks
eafty] U;w uacj 158]
iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
vUuk lykbZ]
gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
pSUubZ&600002
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ
pSUubZ
dkaphiqje
fr#osYywj
fr#oUukeykbZ
osYykSj
foYywiqje
djkbZdy (ikafMpsjh ;w-Vh-)
ekgs (ikafMpsjh ;w-Vh-)
ikafMpsjh (ikafMpsjh ;w-Vh-)
;ue (ikafMpsjh ;w-Vh-)
41- eaMy dk;kZy; f=kph
eaMy dk;kZy;] f=kfp ds
ds ofj"Bre lgk;d
iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu
egkizcU/d]
ftlesa rfeyukMq jkT; ds uhps
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
fn, x, orZeku 26 ftys
f=kph] ih,uch gkml]
'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks
ch,pbZ,y dSyk'kiqje]
iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
ratkSj jksM] f=kph&620014
gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ
vfj;kyqj
dks;Ecrwj
oqQM~Mkyksj
¯MMhxqy
bjksM
dU;koqQekjh
d#M+
enqjbZ
ukxkiV~Vhue
ueDdy
fuyfxjh
iqM~MwdksV~Vh
jkeukFkiqje
lsye
f'koxaxk
ratkowj
Fksuh
fr:usyosyh
fr:ok:j
f=kfp
VwVhdksfju
fojnquxj
/eZiqjh
Ñ".kkfxjh
izsEcywj
fr:iqj
42- eaMy dk;kZy; vkxjk
eaMy dk;kZy;] vkxjk ds
ds ofj"Bre lgk;d
iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu
egkizcU/d]
ftlesa mÙkj izns'k jkT; ds
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
uhps fn, x, orZeku 9 ftys
vkxjk] 1&2] j?kqukFk
'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks
uxj] ,eth jksM]
iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
vkxjk&282002
gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ
(1)
(2)
(3)
(1)
(2)
(3)
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6185
vkxjk
,Vk
fiQjkstkckn
eSuiqjh
eFkqjk
bVkok
gkFkjl
djheuxj
iQ#Z[kkckn
43- eaMy dk;kZy; cjsyh
eaMy dk;kZy;] cjsyh ds
ds ofj"Bre lgk;d
iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu
egkizcU/d]
ftlesa mÙkj izns'k jkT; ds
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
uhps fn, x, orZeku 6 ftys
cjsyh] ihyh Hkhr]
'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks
ckbZ ikl jksM]
iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
cjsyh&243001
gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ
cjsyh
cnk;w¡
y[kheiqj [khjh
ihyh Hkhr
'kkgtgkaiqj
gjnksbZ
44- eaMy dk;kZy; cqyan'kgj
eaMy dk;kZy;] cqya'kgj ds
ds ofj"Bre lgk;d
iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu
egkizcU/d]
ftlesa mÙkj izns'k jkT; ds
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
uhps fn, x, orZeku 2 ftys
cqyan'kgj] ih,uch
'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks
gkml] ;equkiqje]
iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
cqyan'kgj&203001
gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ
cqyan'kgj
vyhx<+
45- eaMy dk;kZy; >kalh
eaMy dk;kZy;] >kalh ds
ds ofj"Bre lgk;d
iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu
egkizcU/d]
ftlesa mÙkj izns'k jkT; ds
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
uhps fn, x, orZeku 7 ftys
>kalh] lq/k u²lx gkse
'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks
ds ikl] dkuiqj jksM]
iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
>kalh&284128
gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ
>kalh
yfyriqj
egksck
ckank
fp=kowQV
gehjiqj
tkykSu
46- eaMy dk;kZy; y[kumQ
eaMy dk;kZy;] y[kumQ ds
ds ofj"Bre lgk;d
iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu
egkizcU/d]
ftlesa mÙkj izns'k jkT; ds
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
uhps fn, x, orZeku 5 ftys
foHkwfr [kaM] xkserh uxj]
'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks
y[kumQ&226001
iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ
y[kumQ
ckjkcadh
lhrkiqj
jk;cjsyh
N=kifr lkgwth egkjkt uxj
47- eaMy dk;kZy; xksj[kiqj
eaMy dk;kZy;] xksj[kiqj ds
ds ofj"Bre lgk;d
iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu
egkizcU/d]
ftlesa mÙkj izns'k jkT; ds
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
uhps fn, x, orZeku 5 ftys
xksj[kiqj] vykniqj]
'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks
rqylh baVj dkWyst ds
iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
lkeus] xksj[kiqj&273001
gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ
xksj[kiqj
nsofj;k
egkjktxat
oqQ'khuxj
lar dchj uxj
48- eaMy dk;kZy; okjk.klh
eaMy dk;kZy;] okjk.klh ds
ds ofj"Bre lgk;d
iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu
egkizcU/d]
ftlesa mÙkj izns'k jkT; ds
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
uhps fn, x, orZeku 13 ftys
okjk.klh] ,l&20@56&Mh]
'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks
fn eky] dSaMh jksM]
iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
okjk.klh dSaV&221002
gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ
(1)
(2)
(3)
(1)
(2)
(3)
6186
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
bykgkckn
vktex<+
dkS'kkach
cfy;k
Hknksgh
pankSyh
xkthiqj
tkSuiqj
emQukFk Hkatu
fetkZiqj
izrkix<+
lksuHknz
okjk.klh
lar jfonkl uxj
49- eaMy dk;kZy; dkuiqj
eaMy dk;kZy;] dkuiqj ds
ds ofj"Bre lgk;d
iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu
egkizcU/d]
ftlesa mÙkj izns'k jkT; ds
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
uhps fn, x, orZeku 6 ftys
dkuiqj] 59@29] fcjgkuk
'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks
jksM] dkuiqj&206001
iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ
iQrsgiqj
vkSjS;k
dUukSt
dkuiqj flVh
dkuiqj nsgkr
mUuko
50- eaMy dk;kZy; esjB
eaMy dk;kZy;] esjB ds
ds ofj"Bre lgk;d
iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu
egkizcU/d]
ftlesa mÙkj izns'k jkT; ds
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
uhps fn, x, orZeku 3 ftys
,yvkbZlh fc¯YMx]
'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks
izHkkr uxj] lkdsr&250001
iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ
ckxir
iap'khy uxj
esjB
51- eaMy dk;kZy; eqjknkckn
eaMy dk;kZy;] eqjknkckn ds
ds ofj"Bre lgk;d
iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu
egkizcU/d]
ftlesa mÙkj izns'k jkT; ds
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
uhps fn, x, orZeku 7 ftys
eqjknkckn] flfoy ykbZUl]
'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks
eqjknkckn&244001
iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ
fctukSj
vejksgk
lEHky
eqjknkckn
T;ksfrckiqQys uxj
jkeiqj
Hkhe uxj
52- eaMy dk;kZy; eqtÝiQjuxj eaMy dk;kZy;] eqtÝiQjuxj
ds ofj"Bre lgk;d
ds iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu
egkizcU/d]
ftlesa mÙkj izns'k jkT; ds
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
uhps fn, x, orZeku 4 ftys
eqtÝiQjuxj
'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks
68 dEcy okyk ckx]
iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
eqtÝiQjuxj&251001
gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ
lgkjuiqj
'kkeyh
izcq¼uxj
eqtÝiQjuxj
53- eaMy dk;kZy; nsgjknwu
eaMy dk;kZy;] nsgjknwu ds
ds ofj"Bre lgk;d
iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu
egkizcU/d]
ftlesa mÙkjk[akM jkT; ds uhps
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
uhps fn, x, orZeku 3 ftys
nsgjknwu] ih,uch gkml]
'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks
iYVu cktkj]
iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
nsgjknwu&248001
gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ
nsgjknwu
mÙkjdk'kh
Vsgjh&x<+oky
54- eaMy dk;kZy; gfj}kj
eaMy dk;kZy;] gfj}kj ds
ds ofj"Bre lgk;d
iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu
egkizcU/d]
ftlesa mÙkjk[kaM jkT; ds uhps
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
fn, x, orZeku 4 ftys
gfj}kj] ih,uch gkml]
'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks
lSDVj&4] ch,p,y
iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
dkWEIySDl] gfj}kj
gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
(1)
(2)
(3)
(1)
(2)
(3)
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6187
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ
gfj}kj
peksyh
ikSMh
#æiz;kx
55- eaMy dk;kZy; dk'khiqj
eaMy dk;kZy;] dk'khiqj ds
ds ofj"Bre lgk;d
iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu
egkizcU/d]
ftlesa mÙkjk[kaM jkT; ds uhps
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
fn, x, orZeku 6 ftys
dk'khiqj] cktiqj jksM]
'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks
dk'khiqj&244713
iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ
vYeksM+k
uSuhrky
m/e ¯lg uxj
fiFkkSjkx<+
ckxs'oj
pEikor
56- eaMy dk;kZy; dksydkrk
eaMy dk;kZy;] $ ds
ds ofj"Bre lgk;d
iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu
egkizcU/d]
ftlesa if'pe caxky jkT;
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
ds uhps fn, x, orZeku 7 ftys
dksydkrk] r`rh; ry]
'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks
,th Vkoj] 125@1]
iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
ikdZ LVªhV]
gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
dksydkrk&700017
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ
dksydkrk
24 ijxuk (nf{k.k)
24 ijxuk (mÙkj)
gkoM+k
fudksckj
mÙkj vkSj eè; vaMeku
nf{k.k vaMeku (iksVZ Cys;j)
57- eaMy dk;kZy; cnZoku
eaMy dk;kZy;] cnZoku ds
ds ofj"Bre lgk;d
iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu
egkizcU/d]
ftlesa if'peh caxky jkT; ds
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
uhps fn, x, orZeku 16 ftys
103] thVh jksM] f}rh; ry]
'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks
iSaQlh ekdsZV dkWEIySDl]
iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
c¼Zoku&713101
gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ
cnZoku
cadqjk
nk£t¯yx
chjHkwe
ekynk
nf{k.k fnuktiqj
gqxyh
tyikbZxqM+h
eq'khZnkckn
mÙkj fnuktiqj
ukfM;k
dwp fcgkj
iwohZ flfDde
mÙkjh flfDde
nf{k.k flfDde
if'pe flfDde
58- eaMy dk;kZy; fenukiqj
eaMy dk;kZy;] fenukiqj ds
ds ofj"Bre lgk;d
iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu
egkizcU/d]
ftlesa if'pe caxky jkT; ds
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
uhps fn, x, orZeku 3 ftys
fenukiqj] fo|klkxj jksM]
'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks
cVkyk pkSd]
iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
fenukiqj&721001
gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ
if'pe fenukiqj
iwohZ fenukiqj
iqjfy;k
59- eaMy dk;kZy; nf{k.k
eaMy dk;kZy;] nf{k.k fnYyh
fnYyh ds ofj"Bre
ds iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu
lgk;d egkizcU/d]
ftlesa fnYyh] gfj;k.kk izns'k
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
jkT; ds uhps fn, x, orZeku
prqFkZ ry] jktsUnz Hkou]
6 ftys 'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj
jktsUnz Iysl]
tks iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
ubZ fnYyh&110008
gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ
nf{k.k fnYyh
nf{k.k iwoZ fnYyh
iQjhnkckn (gfj;k.kk)
xqM+xkao (gfj;k.kk)
(1)
(2)
(3)
(1)
(2)
(3)
6188
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
esokr (gfj;k.kk)
iyoy (gfj;k.kk)
60- eaMy dk;kZy; iSQtkckn
eaMy dk;kZy;] iSQtkckn ds
ds ofj"Bre lgk;d
iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu
egkizcU/d]
ftlesa mÙkj izns'k jkT; ds
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
uhps fn, x, orZeku 9 ftys
iSQtkckn] vkpk;Z
'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks
ujsUnz nso uxj]
iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
iSQtkckn&224001 (m-iz-)
gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ
cLrh
fl¼kFkZ uxj
cyjkeiqj
vEcsMdj uxj
lqYrkuiqj
cgjkbp
iSQtkckn
xksaMk
JkoLrh
61- eaMy dk;kZy; diwjFkyk
eaMy dk;kZy;] diwjFkyk ds
ds ofj"Bre lgk;d
iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu
egkizcU/d]
ftlesa iatkc jkT; ds uhps
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
fn, x, orZeku 3 ftys
diwjFkyk] ih,uch gkml]
'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks
lR;ukjk;.k eafnj cktkj]
iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
diwjFkyk&144601
gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ
xqjnkliqj
diwjFkyk
iBkudksV
62- eaMy dk;kZy; ifV;kyk
eaMy dk;kZy;] ifV;kyk ds
ds ofj"Bre lgk;d
iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu
egkizcU/d]
ftlesa iatkc jkT; ds uhps
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
fn, x, orZeku 6 ftys
ifV;kyk] dje
'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks
dkWEIySDl] lj¯gn jksM]
iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
ifV;kyk&147001 (iatkc)
gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ
lax#j
iQrsgx< lkfgc
jksiM+
eksgkyh
ifV;kyk
ekUlk
63- eaMy dk;kZy; oqQ#{ks=k
eaMy dk;kZy;] oqQ#{ks=k ds
ds ofj"Bre lgk;d
iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu
egkizcU/d]
ftlesa gfj;k.kk jkT; ds uhps
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
fn, x, orZeku 4 ftys
oqQ#{ks=k] Nkrk
'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks
dkWEIySDl] fiiyh jksM]
iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
oqQ#{ks=k&136118 (gfj;k.kk) gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ
dSFky
oqQ#{ks=k
;equkuxj
¯tn
64- eaMy dk;kZy; vyoj
eaMy dk;kZy;] vyoj ds
ds ofj"Bre lgk;d
iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu
egkizcU/d]
ftlesa jktLFkku jkT; ds uhps
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
fn, x, orZeku 2 ftys
vyoj] izFke ry]
'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks
euq ekxZ] vyoj&301001
iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
(jktLFkku)
gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ
vyoj
lhdj
65- eaMy dk;kZy; ,.kkZoqQye
eaMy dk;kZy;] ,.kkZoqQye ds
ds ofj"Bre lgk;d
iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu
egkizcU/d]
ftlesa dsjyk jkT; ds uhps
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
fn, x, orZeku 9 ftys
,.kkZdqye] 40@1461
'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks
ekdsZV jksM]
iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
,.kkZdqye&682011
gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ
vykiw>k
,.kkZoqQye
bnqDdh
dksV~Vk;e
iV~VkufeV~Vk
DohykWu@dksykWe
f=kpwj
(1)
(2)
(3)
(1)
(2)
(3)
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6189
f=kosUnze
dksYye
66- eaMy dk;kZy; lwjr
eaMy dk;kZy;] lwjr ds
ds ofj"Bre lgk;d
iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu
egkizcU/d]
ftlesa xqtjkr jkT; ds uhps
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
fn, x, orZeku 15 ftys
prqFkZ ry] rqylh Ñik
'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks
vkjdsM ckjMksyh jksM
iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
lwjr&394214 (xqtjkr)
gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ
vkuan
Hk:p
ngksM
Mkax
[ksM+k
uolkjh
ueZnk
iapegy
lwjr
rkih
oMksnjk
oylkM
neu (neu ,oa fgM) la?k
'kkflr
}hi (neu ,oa fgM) la?k
'kkflr
nknjk ,oa uxj gosyh la?k
'kkflr
67- eaMy dk;kZy;] uks,Mk
eaMy dk;kZy;] uks,Mk ds
ds ofj"Bre lgk;d
iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu
egkizcU/d]
ftlesa mÙkj izns'k jkT; ds
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
uhps fn, x, orZeku 6 ftys
rhljk ry] lh&13]
'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks
lsDVj 1] uks,Mk
iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
(xkSre cq¼ uxj)]
gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
mÙkj izns'k
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ
xkft;kckn
uks,Mk (xkSre cq¼ uxj)
68- eaMy dk;kZy; eè; fnYyh
eaMy dk;kZy;] eè; fnYyh ds
ds ofj"Bre lgk;d
iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu
egkizcU/d]
ftlesa mÙkj izns'k jkT; ds
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
uhps fn, x, orZeku 4 ftys
prqFkZ ry] jktsUnz Hkou]
'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks
jktsUnz Iysl] ubZ fnYyh
iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ
eè; fnYyh
ubZ fnYyh
nf{k.k if'pe fnYyh
if'peh fnYyh
mÙkjh fnYyh
mÙkjh if'peh fnYyh
69- eaMy dk;kZy; lacyiqj
eaMy dk;kZy;] laHkyiqj ds
ds ofj"Bre lgk;d
iz'kklfud fu;a=k.k ds v/hu
egkizcU/d]
ftlesa mM+hlk jkT; ds uhps
iatkc us'kuy cSad]
fn, x, orZeku 18 ftys
euksjek fc¯YMx nkuhiYyh
'kkfey gSa] esa os ifjlj tks
HkheHkksbZ uxj] iksLV
iatkc us'kuy cSad ds vius
vkfiQl cq¼jktk]
gSa ;k iatkc us'kuy cSad }kjk
laHkyiqj&768005
vFkok iatkc us'kuy cSad dh
vksj ls iêsð ij fy, x, gSa %µ
vuqxy
ckjkx<+
cyafxj
cm/
nsox<+
>kMlqxqMk
dkykgaMh
dka/key
dsU/w>kj
dksjkiwV
eydkufxjh
e;wjHkat
ucjaxkiqj
ukSmikMk
jk;kx<+
lacyiqj
lqcuZiqj
lqUnjx<+
dsvksu>kj
¹iQk- la- 4@3@2013&chvks,º
,e- ,e- nkSyk] voj lfpo
(1)
(2)
(3)
(1)
(2)
(3)
6190
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
New Delhi, the 3rd September, 2014
S.O.
2435.—In exercise of the powers conferred
by section 3 of Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized
Occupants) Act, 1971 (40 of 1971), the Central Government
hereby appoints the Officer mentioned in column No. 2 of
the table below to be Estate Officers for the purpose of the
said Act and further direct that the said officers shall exercise
the powers conferred and the duties imposed on an Estate
Officers by or under the said Act within the local limits of
his jurisdiction in respect of the public premises falling
under area as specified in column No. 3 of the table below:—
S.No. Designation of
Categories of public premises
the Officer
and local limits of control of
jurisdiction
(1)
(2)
(3)
1. Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
Hyderabad, Punjab
Punjab National Bank within
National Bank,
the administrative control of
6-1-73, Lakadi
Circle Office, Hyderabad, in the
Ka Pul, Saifabad,
State of Telangana &
Hyderabad-500004.
Seemandhra,
presently
consisting 23 Districts,
mentioned below :
East Godavari District
Guntur
Chittoor
Hyderabad
Kadapa
Karim Nagar
Krishna
Kurnool
Mahabubnagar
Anantpur
Nalgonda
Nellore
Nizamabad
Prakasam
Ranga Reddy
Srikakulam
Visakhapatnam
Vizianagaram
Warangal
West Godavari District
Medak
Khammam
Adilabad
2. Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
Muzaffarpur,
Punjab National Bank within
Punjab National
the administrative control of
Bank, Aghoria
Circle Office Muzaffarpur, in
Bazar ,
the State of Bihar, presently
Muzafarpur 842002
consisting
9
Districts
mentioned below :
Muzaffarpur
Sitamarhi
Siwan
Gopalganj
East Champaran
West Champaran
Saran
Vaishali
Sheohar
3. Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
Darbhanga,
Punjab National Bank within
Punjab National
the administrative control of
Bank, Darbhanga,
Circle Office Darbhanga, in
Commercial House,
the State of Bihar, presently
Laharia Sarai,
consisting 12 Districts
Darbhanga-846001
mentioned below :
Madhubani
Samastipur
Begusarai
Saharsa
Supaul
Araria
Purnia
Katihar
Kishanganj
Darbhanga
Khagaria
Madhepura
4. Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
Patna,
Punjab National Bank within
Punjab National
the administrative control of
Bank, R-Block,
Circle Office Patna, in the State
Chanakya Tower,
of Bihar, presently consisting
Patna-842001
1 District, mentioned below:
Patna
5. Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
Arrah, Punjab
Punjab National Bank within
National Bank,
the administrative control of
(1)
(2)
(3)
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6191
Arrah, Hotal Regal
Circle Office Arrah, in the State
Complex, 2nd Floor
of Bihar, presently consisting
East Ramanna Road, 4 Districts, mentioned below:
Arrah (Bihar)
Kaimur
Bhojpur
Buxar
Rohtas
6. Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
Bihar Sharif, Punjab
Punjab National Bank within
National Bank,
the administrative control of
Ramchanderpur,
Circle Office Bihar Sharif, in the
Bihar Sharif 803101
State of Bihar, presently
consisting
8
Districts,
mentioned below:
Lahkisarai
Nalanda
Nawada
Jamui
Sheikhpura
Bhagalpur
Munger
Banka
7. Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
Gaya, Punjab
Punjab National Bank within
National Bank,
the administrative control of
Gaya, 400 A.P.
Circle Office of Bihar, pres-
Colony
ently consisting 4 Districts,
Gaya 823001
mentioned below:
Gaya
Aurangabad
Jehanabad
Arwal
8. Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
Raipur, Punjab
Punjab National Bank within
National Bank,
the administrative control of
Madina Manjil
Circle Office Raipur, in the
Kachehri Chowk,
State of Chhattisgarh, pres-
Raipur
ently consisting 27 Districts,
(Chhattisgarh)
mentioned below:
Bastar
Bilaspur
Dhamtari
Durg
Janjgir – Champa
Korba
Koria
Mahassmund
Raigarh
Raipur
Rajnandgaon
Dantewada
Jashpur
Kawardha
Balod
Balodabazar
Balrampur
Bemetara
Bijapur
Gariyaband
Kanker
Kondagaon
Mungeli
Narainpur
Surguja
Sukma
Surajpur
9. Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
North Delhi, Punjab
Punjab National Bank within
National Bank,
the administrative control of
4th Floor, Rajendra
Circle Office North Delhi, in
Bhawan, Rajendra
the State of Delhi presently
Place, New Delhi
consisting 6 Districts, men-
tioned below:
East Delhi
North East Delhi
North Delhi
North West Delhi
West Delhi
Central Delhi
10. Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
Ahmedabad, Punjab Punjab National Bank within
National Bank,
the administrative control of
Gujarat Bhawan
Circle Office Ahmedabad, in
facing MJ Library,
the State of Gujarat, and
Elice Pul, Ashram
Lakshadweep (UT) presently
Road, Ahmedabad-
consisting 16 Districts, men-
380006
tioned below:
Ahmedabad
Amreli
Bhavnagar
Banaskantha
Gandhinagar
(1)
(2)
(3)
(1)
(2)
(3)
6192
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
Jamnagar
Junagadh
Kutch
Mehsana
Patan
Porbandar
Rajkot
Sabarkantha
Surendranagar
Morbi
Lakshadweep (U.T.)
11. Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
Chandigarh, Punjab
Punjab National Bank within
National Bank,
the administrative control of
PNB House,
Circle Office Chandigarh, in
Sector 17-B,
the State of Haryana, &
Chandigarh-160017
Chandigarh (UT) presently
consisting 3 Districts, men-
tioned below:
Chandigarh (UT)
Panchkula (Haryana)
Ambala (Haryana)
12. Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
Hisar, Punjab
Punjab National Bank within
National Bank,
the administrative control of
Hisar, Opposite
Circle Office Hisar, in the State
ITI Chowk, Dabra
of Haryana, presently consist-
Road, Hisar-125005
ing 3 Districts, mentioned
below:
Hisar
Sirsa
Fatehabad
13. Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
Karnal, Punjab
Punjab National Bank within
National Bank,
the administrative control of
Bay-21-22,
Circle Office Karnal, in the
Sector-12, HUDA
State of Haryana, presently
Karnal 132001
consisting 3 Districts, men-
tioned below:
Karnal
Panipat
Sonepat
14. Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
Rohtak, Punjab
Punjab National Bank within
National Bank,
the administrative control of
Rohtak, Ram
Circle Office Rohtak in the
Gopal Colony,
State of Haryana, presently
Sonepat Road,
consisting 5 Districts, men-
Rohtak 124001
tioned below:
Rohtak
Jhajjhar
Rewari
Mahendragarh
Bhiwani
15. Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
Shimla, Punjab
Punjab National Bank within
National Bank,
the administrative control of
Shimla, Regent
Circle Office Shimla in the
House, The Mall,
State of Himachal Pradesh,
Shimla-171001
presently consisting 4 Dis-
tricts, mentioned below:
Kinnaur
Shimla
Sirmaur
Solan
16. Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
Dharamshala,
Punjab National Bank within
Punjab National
the administrative control of
Bank, Kachehri
Circle Office Dharamshala, in
Road, Near GPO,
the State of Himachal Pradesh,
Dharamshala-
presently consisting 2 Dis-
176215
tricts, mentioned below:
Kangra
Chamba
17 Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
Hamir pur, Punjab
Punjab National Bank within
National Bank,
the administrative control of
Hamirpur, New Road, Circle Office Hamirpur in the
Hamirpur-177001
State of Himachal Pradesh,
presently consisting 3 districts
mentioned below:
Hamirpur
Una
Bilaspur
18 Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
Mandi, Punjab
Punjab National Bank within
National Bank,
the administrative control of
M.R. Road,
Circle Office Mandi in the State
Batala Chowk
of Himachal Pradesh, pres-
Mandi-175001
ently consisting 3 Districts,
mentioned below :
(1)
(2)
(3)
(1)
(2)
(3)
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6193
Mandi
Kullu
Keylong
19. Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
Jammu, Punjab
Punjab National Bank within
National Bank,
the administrative control of
High Land Tower
Circle Office Jammu, in the
Rail Head Complex,
State of J & K, presently con-
Jammu-180012
sisting 21 Districts, mentioned
below :
Jammu
Kathua
Samba
Poonch
Rajouri
Doda
Reasi
Ramban
Udhampur
Srinagar
Anantnag
Kargil
Pulwama
Badgam
Baramulla
Kupwara
Leh
Ganderbal
Bandipora
Kishtwar
Sopian
20. Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
Ranchi, Punjab
Punjab National Bank within
National Bank,
the administrative control of
Bagrai Market,
Circle Office Ranchi, in the
Main Road, Ranchi
State of Jharkhand, presently
834001 (Jharkhand)
consisting 24 Districts, men-
tioned below:
Ranchi
East Singhbhum
West Singhbhum
Saraikela
Bokaro
Dhanbad
Palamu
Latehar
Garhwa
Giridih
Hazaribagh
Chatra
Lohardaga
Godda
Deoghar
Dumka
Gumla
Jamatra
Khunti
Koderma
Pakur
Ramgarh
Sahebganj
Simdega
21. Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
Karnataka, Punjab
Punjab National Bank within
National Bank,
the administrative control of
26-27, M.G. Road,
Circle Office Bangalore, in the
Raheja Towers,
State of Karnataka, presently
Bangalore-560001
consisting 30 Districts, men-
tioned below:
Bangalore
Ramnagara
Belgaum
Bidar
Bijapur
Dakshin Kannada
Dharwad
Davangere
Gadag
Gulbarga
Hassan
Kolar
Mandya
Mysore
North Kannada
Shimoga
Tumkur
Udipi
Bellari
Bagalkot
Banglore Rural
(1)
(2)
(3)
(1)
(2)
(3)
6194
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
Chamrajanagar
Chikmanglore
Chikballapur
Chitradurga
Haveri
Kodagu
Koppal
Raichur
Yadagiri
22. Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
Kozhikode, Punjab
Punjab National Bank within
National Bank,
the administrative control of
Shatabadi Bhawan,
Circle Office Kozhikode in the
Mini Bypass Road,
State of Kerala, presently con-
PO. Govindpuram,
sisting 6 Districts, mentioned
Kozhikode-673016
below:
Kannur
Kasargod
Kozhikode
Malapuram
Palakad
Wyanad
23. Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
Bhopal, Punjab
Punjab National Bank within
National Bank,
the administrative control of
Bhopal, PNB House, Circle Office Bhopal, in the
Arera Hills,
State of Madhya Pradesh,
Bhopal-4622011
presently consisting 12 Dis-
tricts, mentioned below:
Betul
Bhopal
Datia
Hoshangabad
Harda
Sehore
Vidisha
Gwalior
Morena
Sheopur
Raisen
Bhind
24. Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
Indore, Punjab
Punjab National Bank within
National Bank,
the administrative control of
Indore 20,
Circle Office Indore, in the
Sneh Nagar,
State of Madhya Pradesh,
Indore-452001
presently consisting 19 Dis-
tricts, mentioned below:
Indore
Barwani
Khargone
Mandsaur
Neemuch
Rajgarh
Guna
Ashok Nagar
Khandwa
Burhanpur
Ratlam
Shajapur
Shivpuri
Ujjain
Dewas
Dhar
Jhabua
Agar
Alirajpur
25. Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
Jabalpur, Punjab
Punjab National Bank within
National Bank,
the administrative control of
Jabalpur, 1227,
Circle Office Jabalpur, in the
Napier Town,
State of Madhya Pradesh,
Jabalpur-482001
presently consisting 20 Dis-
tricts, mentioned below:
Balaghat
Chhatarpur
Chhindwara
Dindore
Damoh
Jabalpur
Katni
Mandla
Narsinghpur
Rewa
Seoni
Sagar
Satna
Sidhi
Singrauli
Anuppur
Panna
(1)
(2)
(3)
(1)
(2)
(3)
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6195
Shahdol
Tikamgarh
Umaria
26. Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
Mumbai, Punjab
Punjab National Bank within
National Bank,
the administrative control of
Plot No. C-9,
Circle Office Mumbai, in the
G Block, Bandra
State of Maharashtra, pres-
Kurla Complex,
ently consisting 4 Districts,
Bandra (East)
mentioned below :
Mumbai
Mumbai
(Maharashtra)
Mumbai Suburban
Thane
Raigad
27. Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
Nagpur, Punjab
Punjab National Bank within
National Bank,
the administrative control of
PNB House,
Circle Office Nagpur, in the
Kingsway,
State of Maharashtra, pres-
Nagpur-440001
ently consisting 16 Districts,
mentioned below:
Akola
Amravati
Buldhana
Chandrapur
Gondia
Jalgaon
Nagpur
Nanded
Wardha
yeotmal
Latur
Parbhani
Bhandara
Gadchirolli
Hingoli
Washim
28. Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
Pune, Punjab
Punjab National Bank within
National Bank,
the administrative control of
Arora Towers
Circle Office Pune, in the State
Beznine Floor,
of Maharashtra & Goa, pres-
9 Moledine Road,
ently consisting 17 Districts,
Pune Camp,
mentioned below:
Pune-411001
Pune
Ahmednagar
Aurangabad
Dhulia
Kolhapur
Nasik
Sangli
Solapur
Ratnagiri
Sindudurg
Satara
Nandurbar
Beed
Osmanabad
Jalna
North Goa
South Goa
29. Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
North Eastern
Punjab National Bank within
Circle, Punjab
the administrative control of
National Bank,
Circle Office Guwahati, in the
Neelgiri Mansion,
state of Assam, Arunachal
Bhangadhar,
Pradesh Meghalaya, Manipur,
G S Road,
Tripura, Nagaland, Mizoram,
Guwahati
presently consisting 82 Dis-
tricts, mentioned below.
Barpeta (Assam)
Bongaigaon (Assam)
Cachar (Assam)
Dibrugarh (Assam)
Goleghat (Assam)
Jorhat (Assam)
Kamrup (Assam)
Karimganj (Assam)
Nalbari (Assam)
North Cachar Hills (Assam)
Nagaon (Assam)
Tinsukia (Assam)
Sonitpur (Assam)
Baksa (Assam)
Chirang ( Assam)
Morigaon (Assam)
Dhubri (Assam)
Dhemaji (Assam)
Hailakandi (Assam)
Goalpara (Assam)
Udalgiri (Assam)
Darrang (Assam)
(1)
(2)
(3)
(1)
(2)
(3)
6196
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
Sibsagar (Assam)
Kamrup–Metropolitan (Assam)
Karbi Anglong (Assam)
Kokrajhar (Assam)
Lakhimpur (Assam)
Anjaw (Arunachal Pradesh)
Changland (Arunachal
Pradesh)
Dibang Valley (Arunachal
Pradesh)
East Kameng (Arunachal
Pradesh)
East Siang (Arunachal
Pradesh)
Kurung Kumaey (Arunachal
Pradesh)
Lohit (Arunachal Pradesh)
Lower Dibang Valley
(Arunachal Pradesh)
Lower Subansiri (Arunachal
Pradesh)
Papumpare (Arunachal
Pradesh)
Tawang (Arunachal Pradesh)
Tirap (Arunachal Pradesh)
Upper Siang (Arunachal
Pradesh)
Upper Subansiri (Arunachal
Pradesh)
West Kameng (Arunachal
Pradesh)
West Siang (Arunachal
Pradesh)
Bishnupur (Manipur)
Chandel (Manipur)
Churachandpur (Manipur)
Imphal East (Manipur)
Imphal West (Manipur)
Senapati (Manipur)
Tamenglong (Manipur)
Thoubal (Manipur)
Ukhrul (Manipur)
East Garo Hills (Meghalya)
East Khasi Hills (Meghalya)
Jaintia Hills (Meghalya)
Ribhoi (Meghalya)
South Garo Hills (Meghalya)
West Garo Hills (Meghalya )
West Khasi Hills (Meghalya)
Aizawl (Mizoram)
Champhai (Mizoram)
Kolasib (Mizoram)
Lunglei (Mizoram)
Lwangtlai (Mizoram)
Mamit (Mizoram)
Saiha (Mizoram)
Sarchhip (Mizoram)
Dimapur (Nagaland)
Junheboto (Nagaland)
Kephrie (Nagaland)
Kohima (Nagaland)
Longleng (Nagaland)
Mokokchung (Nagaland)
Mon (Nagaland)
Peren (Nagaland)
Phek (Nagaland)
Tuensang (Nagaland)
Wokha (Nagaland)
Dhalai (Tripura)
North Tripura (Tripura)
South Tripura (Tripura)
West Tripura (Tripura)
30. Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
Bhubaneshwar,
Punjab National Bank within
Punjab National
the administrative control of
Bank, 4th Floor,
Circle Office Bhubaneshwar, in
Deendayal Bhawan, the state of Orissa presently
Ashok Nagar,
consisting 12 Districts,
Janpath,
mentioned below:
Bhubaneshwar,
Balasore
Orissa-751009
Bhadrak
Cuttack
Dhenkanal
Gajapati
Ganjam
Jajpur
Jagat Singhpur
Khurdha
Nayagarh
Puri
Kendrapara
31. Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
Amritsar, Punjab
Punjab National Bank within
(1)
(2)
(3)
(1)
(2)
(3)
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6197
National Bank,
the administrative control of
Amritsar, IInd Floor, Circle Office , Amritsar, in the
Macload Road,
state of Punjab presently con-
Opposite St.
sisting 2 Districts, mentioned
Francies School,
below :
Amritsar-143001
Amritsar
Taran Taran
32. Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
Hoshiarpur, Punjab
Punjab National Bank within
National Bank,
the administrative control of
Improvement Trust
Circle Office Hoshiarpur, in the
Road Chandigarh
state of Punjab presently con-
Road, Hoshiarpur-
sisting 3 Districts, mentioned
146001
below :
Hoshiarpur
Shahid Bhagat Singh Nagar
Nawanshahar
33. Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
Jalandhar, Punjab
Punjab National Bank within
National Bank,
the administrative control of
Jalandhar,
Circle Office , Jalandhar, in the
Civil Lines,
state of Punjab presently con-
Jalandhar-144001
sisting 1 Districts, mentioned
below :
Jalandhar
34. Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
Bathinda, Punjab
Punjab National Bank within
National Bank,
the administrative control of
Bathinda, SCO-29-31 Circle Office, Bathinda, in the
Model Town Phase-I, state of Punjab presently con-
Facing TV Tower,
sisting 6 Districts, mentioned
Bathinda-151001
below:
Bathinda
Barnala
Firozepur
Fazilka
Faridkot
Muktsar
35. Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
Ludhiana, Punjab
Punjab National Bank within
National Bank,
the administrative control of
Site No. 5,
Circle Office Ludhiana, in the
Firozepur Road,
state of Punjab presently con-
Ludhiana-141001
sisting 2 Districts, mentioned
below :
Ludhiana
Moga
36. Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
Jaipur, Punjab
Punjab National Bank within
National Bank,
the administrative control of
Jaipur, PNB House,
Circle Office, Jaipur, in the
2 Nehru Place,
state of Rajasthan presently
Tonk Road,
consisting 7 Districts, men-
Jaipur-302015
tioned below :—
Jaipur
Dausa
Tonk
Kota
Bundi
Baran
Jhalawar
37. Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
Bharatpur, Punjab
Punjab National Bank within
National Bank,
the administrative control of
Bharatpur, PNB
Circle Office, Bharatpur, in the
House, Super Bazar, state of Rajasthan presently
Bharatpur-302001
consisting 4 Districts, men-
tioned below :
Bharatpur
Dholpur
Sawai Madhopur
Karauli
38. Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
Jodhpur, Punjab
Punjab National Bank within
National Bank,
the administrative control of
Jodhpur, 802,
Circle Office, Jodhpur, in the
1st Floor,
state of Rajasthan presently
Chopasini Road,
consisting 15 Districts, men-
Jodhpur-302003
tioned below :
Ajmer
Banswara
Barmer
Bhilwara
Chittorgarh
Dungarpur
Jaisalmer
Jalore
Jodhpur
Nagore
Pali
Pratapgarh
Rajsamand
Sirohi
Udaipur
(1)
(2)
(3)
(1)
(2)
(3)
6198
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
39. Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
Sriganganagar,
Punjab National Bank within
Punjab National
the administrative control of
Bank, Sriganganagar Circle Office, Sriganganagar, in
PNB House,
the state of Rajasthan pres-
Meera Marg,
ently consisting 5 Districts,
Jawahar Nagar,
mentioned below :
Srigaganagar-
Bikaner
335001
Churu
Jhunjhunu
Hanumangarh
Sriganganagar
40. Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
Chennai, Punjab
Punjab National Bank within
National Bank,
the administrative control of
Chennai, Royala
Circle Office, Chennai, in the
Towers Third Floor,
state of Tamilnadu presently
New No. 158, Salai
consisting 10 Districts, men-
Chennai-600002
tioned below :
Chennai
Kanchipuram
Tiruvallur
Tiruvannamalai
Vellore
Villupuram
Karaikal (Puducherry U.T.)
Mahe (Puducherry U.T.)
Puducherry (Puducherry U.T.)
Yanam (Puducherry U.T.)
41. Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
Trichy, Punjab
Punjab National Bank within
National Bank,
the administrative control of
Trichy, PNB House,
Circle Office, Trichy, in the
BHEL Kailashpuram, state of Tamilnadu presently
Tanjore Road,
consisting 26 Districts, men-
Trichy-620014
tioned below :
Ariyalur
Coimbatore
Cuddalore
Dindigul
Erode
Kanyakumari
Karur
Madurai
Nagapattinam
Namakkal
Nilgiris
Pudukottai
Ramanathapuram
Salem
Sivaganga
Thanjavur
Theni
Thirunelveli
Tiruvarur
Trichy
Tuticorin
Virudunagar
Dharampuri
Krishnagiri
Perambalur
Tirupur
42. Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
Agra, Punjab
Punjab National Bank within
National Bank,
the administrative control of
Agra, 1-2, Rahunath Circle Office, Agra, in the state
Nagar, M.G. Road,
of Uttar Pradesh presently
Agra-282002
consisting 9 Districts, men-
tioned below :
Agra
Etah
Firozabad
Mainpuri
Mathura
Etawah
Hathras
Kashiram Nagar
Farrukhabad
43. Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
Bareilly, Punjab
Punjab National Bank within
National Bank,
the administrative control of
Bareilly, PNB House, Circle Office, Bareilly, in the
Pilibhit bye pass
state of Uttar Pradesh pres-
Road, Bareilly-
ently consisting 6 Districts,
243001
mentioned below :
Bareilly
Budaun
Lakhimpur Kheri
Pilibhit
Shahjahanpur
Hardoi
(1)
(2)
(3)
(1)
(2)
(3)
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6199
44. Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
Bulandshahr, Punjab Punjab National Bank within
National Bank,
the administrative control of
Bulandshahr,
Circle Office, Bulandshahr, in
PNB House,
the state of Uttar Pradesh
Yamunapuram,
presently consisting 2 Dis-
Bulandshahr-203001 tricts, mentioned below :
Bulandshahar
Aligarh
45. Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
Jhansi, Punjab
Punjab National Bank within
National Bank,
the administrative control of
Jhansi, Near Sudha
Circle Office, Jhansi, in the
Nursing Home,
state of Uttar Pradesh pres-
Kanpur Road,
ently consisting 7 Districts,
Jhansi-284128
mentioned below :
Jhansi
Lalitpur
Mahoba
Banda
Chitrakoot
Hamirpur
Jalaun
46. Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
Lucknow, Punjab
Punjab National Bank within
National Bank,
the administrative control of
Lucknow, Bibhuti
Circle Office, Lucknow, in the
Khand, Gomtinagar,
state of Uttar Pradesh pres-
Lucknow-226001
ently consisting 5 Districts,
mentioned below :
Lucknow
Barabanki
Sitapur
Raibareli
Chhatrapati Sahu ji Maharaj
Nagar
47. Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
Gorakhpur, Punjab
Punjab National Bank within
National Bank,
the administrative control of
Gorakhpur, Alladpur Circle Office, Gorakhpur, in the
Opposite Tulsi
state of Uttar Pradesh pres-
Inter College,
ently consisting 5 Districts,
Gorakhpur-273001
mentioned below :
Gorakhpur
Deoria
Maharajganj
Kushinagar
Sant KabirNagar
48. Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
Varanasi, Punjab
Punjab National Bank within
National Bank,
the administrative control of
Varanasi, S-20/56-D, Circle Office, Varanasi, in the
The Mall, Canady
state of Uttar Pradesh pres-
Road, Varanasi Cantt. ently consisting 14 Districts,
Varanasi-221002
mentioned below :
Allahabad
Azamgarh
Kaushambi
Ballia
Bhadohi
Chandauli
Ghazipur
Jaunpur
Maunath Bhanjan
Mirzapur
Pratapgarh
Sonbhadra
Varanasi
Sant Ravidas Nagar
49. Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
Kanpur, Punjab
Punjab National Bank within
National Bank,
the administrative control of
Kanpur, 59/29,
Circle Office, Kanpur, in the
Birhana Road,
state of Uttar Pradesh pres-
Kanpur-206001
ently consisting 6 Districts,
mentioned below :
Fatehpur
Auriya
Kannauj
Kanpur City
Kanpur Dehat
Unnao
50. Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
Meerut, Punjab
Punjab National Bank within
National Bank,
the administrative control of
Meerut, LIC Bldg,
Circle Office, Meerut, in the
Prabhat Nagar,
state of Uttar Pradesh pres-
Saket, Meerut-
ently consisting 3 Districts,
250001
mentioned below :
Baghpat
Panchsheel Nagar
Meerut
(1)
(2)
(3)
(1)
(2)
(3)
6200
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
51. Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
Moradabad, Punjab
Punjab National Bank within
National Bank,
the administrative control of
Moradabad, Ram
Circle Office, Moradabad, in
Ganga Vihar,
the state of Uttar Pradesh
Civil Lines,
presently consisting 7 Dis-
Moradabad-244001
tricts, mentioned below:
Bijnor
Amroha
Sambhal
Moradabad
Jyotiba Phule Nagar
Rampur
Bhim Nagar
52. Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
Muzaffarnagar,
Punjab National Bank within
Punjab National
the administrative control of
Bank, Muzaffarnagar, Circle Office, Muzaffarnagar,
68 Kumbal Wala
in the state of Uttar Pradesh
Bagh, Muzaffarnagar- presently consisting 4 Dis-
251001
tricts, mentioned below :
Saharanpur
Shamli
Prabudhnagar
Muzaffarnagar
53. Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
Dehradun, Punjab
Punjab National Bank within
National Bank,
the administrative control of
Dehradune, PNB
Circle Office, Dehradun, in the
House, Paltan Bazar, state of Uttarakhand presently
Dehradun-248001
consisting 3 Districts, men-
tioned below :
Dehradun
Uttarkashi
Tehri-Garhwal
54. Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
Hardwar, Punjab
Punjab National Bank within
National Bank,
the administrative control of
Hardwar, PNB
Circle Office, Hardwar, in the
House, Sector-4,
state of Uttarakhand presently
BHEL Complex,
consisting 4 Districts, men-
Hardwar
tioned below :
Hardwar
Chamoli
Pauri-Garhwal
Rudraprayag
55. Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
Kashipur, Punjab
Punjab National Bank within
National Bank,
the administrative control of
Kashipur, Bazpur
Circle Office, Kashipur, in the
Road, Kashipur-
state of Uttarakhand presently
244716
consisting 6 Districts, men-
tioned below :
Almora
Nainital
Udham Singh Nagar
Pithoragarh
Bageshwar
Champawat
56. Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
Kolkata, Punjab
Punjab National Bank within
National Bank,
the administrative control of
Kolkata, III Floor,
Circle Office, Kolkata, in the
AG Tower, 125/1,
state
of
West
Bengal
Park Street,
Andaman (UT) presently con-
Kolkata-700017
sisting 7 Districts, mentioned
below :
Kolkata
24 Parganas (South)
24 Parganas (North)
Howrah
Nicobar
North &Middle Andaman
South Andaman (Port Blair)
57. Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
Burdwan, Punjab
Punjab National Bank within
National Bank,
the administrative control of
103, GT Road,
Circle Office, Burdwan, in the
II Floor, Fancy
state of West Bengal presently
Market Complex,
consisting 16 Districts, men-
Burdwan-713101
tioned below ;
Burdwan
Bankura
Darjeeling
Birbhum
Malda
Dakshin Dinajpur
Hoogly
Jalpaiguri
Murshidabad
Uttar Dinajpur
(1)
(2)
(3)
(1)
(2)
(3)
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6201
Nadia
Cooch Bihar
East Sikkim
North Sikkim
South Sikkim
West Sikkim
58. Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
Midnapur, Punjab
Punjab National Bank within
National Bank,
the administrative control of
Midnapur,
Circle Office, Midnapore, in
Vidyasagar Road,
the state of West Bengal pres-
Batala Chowk,
ently consisting 3 Districts,
Midnapore-721101
mentioned below
West Midnapore
East Midnapore
Purulia
59. Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
South Delhi, Punjab Punjab National Bank within
National Bank,
the administrative control of
4th Floor, Rajendra
Circle Office, South Delhi, in
Bhawan, Rajendra
the state of Delhi & Haryana
Place, New Delhi
presently consisting 6 Dis-
tricts, mentioned below:
South Delhi
South West Delhi
Faridabad (Haryana)
Gurgaon (Haryana)
Mewat (Haryana)
Palwal (Haryana)
60. Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
Faizabad, Punjab
Punjab National Bank within
National Bank,
the administrative control of
Faizabad, Acharya
Circle Office, Faizabad, in the
Narendra Dev Nagar, state of Uttar Pradesh pres-
Faizabad-224001
ently consisting 9 Districts,
(U.P.)
mentioned below :
Basti
Siddhartnagar
Balrampur
Ambedkarnagar
Sultanpur
Bahraich
Faizabad
Gonda
Srawasti
61. Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
Kapoorthala, Punjab Punjab National Bank within
National Bank,
the administrative control of
Kapoorthala, PNB
Circle Office, Kapoorthala in
House, Satya Narain the state of Punjab presently
Mandir Bazar,
consisting 3 Districts, men-
Kapoorthala-144601 tioned below :
Gurudaspur
Kapoorthala
Pathankot
62. Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
Patiala, Punjab
Punjab National Bank within
National Bank,
the administrative control of
Patiala, Karam
Circle Office, Patiala in the
Complex, Sirhind
state of Punjab presently con-
Road, Patiala-147001 sisting 6 Districts, mentioned
(Punjab)
below :
Sangrur
Fatehgarh sahib
Ropar
Mohali
Patiala
Mansa
63. Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
Kurukshetra, Punjab Punjab National Bank within
National Bank,
the administrative control of
Kurukshetra, Chhata Circle Office, Kurukshetra in
Complex, Pipli Road
the state of Haryana presently
Kurukshetra-136118 consisting 4 Districts, men-
(Haryana)
tioned below :
Kaithal
Kurukshetra
Yamunanagar
Jind
64. Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
Alwar, Punjab
Punjab National Bank within
National Bank,
the administrative control of
Alwar, Pratham
Circle Office, Alwar in the state
Manzil Manu Marg, of Rajasthan presently con-
Alwar-301001
sisting 2 Districts, mentioned
(Rajasthan)
below :
Alwar,
Sikar
(1)
(2)
(3)
(1)
(2)
(3)
6202
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
65. Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
Ernakulam, Punjab
Punjab National Bank within
National Bank,
the administrative control of
Ernakulam, 40/1461,
Circle Office, Ernakulam in the
Market Road,
state of Kerala presently con-
Ernakulam-682011
sisting 9 Districts, mentioned
below :—
Alapuzha
Ernakulam
Idukki
Kottayam
Pathanmitha
Quilon
Thrissur
Thiruvananthapuram
Kollam
66. Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
Surat, Punjab
Punjab National Bank within
National Bank,
the administrative control of
4th Floor, Tulsi
Circle Office, Surat in the state
Kripa Archade,
of Gujarat presently consisting
Bardoli Road,
15 Districts, mentioned below:
Surat-394214
Anand,
(Gujarat)
Bharuch,
Dahod,
Dang,
Kheda,
Navsari,
Narmada,
Panchmahal,
Surat,
Tapi,
Vadodra,
Valsad,
Daman (Daman & Diu U T),
Diu (Daman & Diu U T),
Dadra & Nagar Haveli (UT)
67. Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
Noida, Punjab
Punjab National Bank within
National Bank,
the administrative control of
3rd Floor, C-13,
Circle Office, Noida in the state
Sector 1, Noida,
of Uttar Pradesh presently
(1)
(2)
(3)
(1)
(2)
(3)
(Gautam Budh Nagar) consisting 2 Districts, men-
U.P.
tioned below:-
Ghaziabad
Noida (Gautam Budh Nagar)
68. Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
Central Delhi, Punjab Punjab National Bank within
National Bank,
the administrative control of
4th Floor, Rajendra
Circle Office, Central Delhi in
Bhawan, Rajendra
the state of Delhi presently
Place, New Delhi
consisting 6 Districts, men-
tioned below:-
Central Delhi,
New Delhi,
South West Delhi,
West Delhi,
North Delhi,
North West Delhi
69. Senior most AGM
Premises, belonging to or taken
of Circle Office,
on lease by or on behalf of
Sambalpur, Punjab
Punjab National Bank within
National Bank,
the administrative control of
Sambalpur : Manorma Circle Office, Sambhalpur in
Building Danipalli,
the state of Odhisa presently
Bhimbhoinaghar
consisting 18 Districts, men-
PO : Budhraja
tioned below:-
Sambalpur-768005
Anugul,
Baragarh,
Balangir,
Boudh,
Deogarh,
Jharsuguda,
Kalahandi,
Kandhamal,
Koraput,
Malkangiri,
Mayurbhanj,
Nabrangapur,
Nuapada,
Rayagada,
Sambalpur,
Subarnapur,
Sundergarh,
Keonjhar
[F. No. 4/3/2013-BOA]
M. M. DAWLA, Under Secy.
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6203
ekuo lalk/u fodkl ea=kky;
(mPprj f'k{kk foHkkx)
(jktHkk"kk ;wfuV)
ubZ fnYYkh] 8 flrEcj] 2014
dk-vk- 2436.—dsUnzh; ljdkj] jktHkk"kk (la?k ds 'kkldh;
iz;kstuksa ds fy, iz;ksx) fu;e] 1976 ds fu;e 10 ds mi&fu;e 4
ds vuqlj.k esa] ekuo lalk/u fodkl ea=kky; (LowQy f'k{kk ,oa
lk{kjrk foHkkx) ds varxZr dsanzh; fo|ky; laxBu (eq[;ky;)]
ubZ fnYyh ds fuEufyf[kr 6 dsanzh; fo|ky;ksa dks] ,sls dk;kZy;ksa ds
:i esa] ftlds 80 izfr'kr ls vf/d deZpkjh&o`Un us fgUnh dk
dk;Zlk/d Kku izkIr dj fy;k gS] vf/lwfpr djrh gS %
1- dsanzh; fo|ky;] dBk;rckMk] ckxs'oj] (mÙkjk[k.M)&263642
2- dsanzh; fo|ky;] xksis'oj] ifB;ky/kj (,-,u-,e- izf'k{k.k
dsanz ds lehi)] ftyk peksyh (mÙkjk[k.M)&246401
3- dsanzh; fo|ky;] jsyos dkWyksuh] iqQysjk] ftyk&t;iqj
(jktLFkku)&303338
4- dsanzh; fo|ky;] (lh-lq-c-) jk;¯lguxj] ftyk&Jhxaxkuxj]
(jktLFkku)&335051
5- dsanzh; fo|ky;] fprjatu] ftyk&cnZoku (i- caxky)&713331
6- dsanzh; fo|ky;] vkbZ vkbZ ,e tksdk] Mk;eaM gkcZj jksM]
dksydkrk&700104
¹la- 11011&3@2014&jk-Hkk-,-º
vkj- ih- fllksfn;k] la;qDr lfpo
MINISTRY OF HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT
(Department of Higher Education)
(O.L. UNIT)
New Delhi, the 8th September, 2014
S.O. 2436.—In pursuance of sub-rule (4) of rule 10
of the Official Languages (Use for Official Purposes of the
Union) Rules, 1976, the Central Government hereby notifies
the following 6 Kendriya Vidyalayas of Kendriya Vidyalaya
Sangathan (HQ), New Delhi under the Ministry of Human
Resource Development, (Department of School Education
& Literacy) as offices, whose more than 80% members of
the staff have acquired working knowledge of Hindi :
1.
Kendriya Vidyalaya, Kathayatbara, Bagheshwar
(Uttarakhand)-263642
2.
Kendriya Vidyalaya, Pathiyaldhar (Near ANM
Training Centre), Gopeshwar, Distt-Chamoli
(Uttarakhand)-246401
3.
Kendriya Vidyalaya, Railway Colony, Phulera, Distt-
Jaipur (Rajasthan)-303338
4.
Kendriya Vidyalaya, (BSF) Raisinghnagar, Distt-
Shriganganagar (Rajasthan)-335501
5.
Kendriya Vidyalaya, Chittranjan, Distt-Burdwan
(West Bengal)-713331
6.
Kendriya Vidyalaya, IIM Joka, Diamond Harbour
Road, Kolkata-700104
[No. 11011-3/2014-O.L.U.]
R. P. SISODIA, Jt. Secy.
lapkj vkSj lwpuk çkS|ksfxdh ea=kky;
(Mkd foHkkx)
ubZ fnYYkh] 4 flrEcj] 2014
dk-vk- 2437.—pwafd dsUnzh; ljdkj dk er gS fd Jh
jfo izdk'k Hkxr] duf"B ys[kkdkj ls lacaf/r foHkkxh; tk¡p ds
iz;kstu ds fy, uk;c rglhynkj ,oa dk;Zikyd n.Mkf/dkjh]
xksj[kiqj] tcyiqj] eè;izns'k dks lk{kh ds :i esa cqykus@muls dksbZ
nLrkost ysus dh vko';drk gS A
vr% foHkkxh; tk¡p (lkf{k;ksa dh mifLFkfr ds izorZu ,oa
nLrkostksa ds izLrqrhdj.k) vf/fu;e] 1972 (1972 dk 18) dh
èkkjk 4 dh mi&/kjk (1) esa iznÙk 'kfDr;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq,
dsanzh; ljdkj blds }kjk Jh vt; oqQekj] lgk;d v{kh{kd
Mkd?kj] eq[; iksLVekLVj tujy dk dk;kZy;] fnYyh ifjeaMy]
ubZ fnYyh dks uk;c rglhynkj ,oa dk;Zikyd n.Mkf/dkjh]
xksj[kiqj] tcyiqj] eè;izns'k ds laca/ esa mDr vf/fu;e dh /kjk
5 esa fofu£n"V 'kfDr;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq, tk¡p vf/dkjh dk
izkfèkdkj iznku djrh gS A
¹la- iz'kk- III@LVkiQ@vuq'kk-@jfoº
olqfe=k] eq[; iksLVekLVj tujy
MINISTRY OF COMMUNICATION AND
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
(Department of Posts)
New Delhi, the 4th September, 2014
S.O. 2437.—Whereas the Central Government is of
opinion that for the purposes of the departmental inquiry
relating to Shri Ravi Prakash Bhagat, Jr. Acctt, it is necessary
to summon as witness/call for any document form Nayab
Tehsildar evam Karyapalik Dandadhikari, Gorakhpur,
Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh.
Now therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred
by sub-section (1) of Section 4 of the Deparmental Inquiries
(Enforcement of Attendance of witnesses and Production
of Documents) Act 1972 (18 of 1972) the Central Government
hereby authorizes Shri Ajay Kumar, ASP, o/o CPMG, Delhi
Circle, New Delhi as the inquiring Authority to exercise the
power specified in Section 5 of the said Act in relation to
Nayab Tehsildar evam Karyapalik Dandadhikari, gorakhpur,
Jabalpur, madhya Pradesh.
[No. Admn. III/Staff/Disc/Ravi]
VASUMITRA, Chief Postmaster General
6204
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
miHkksDrk ekeys [kk| ,oa lkoZtfud forj.k ea=kky;
(miHkksDrk ekeys foHkkx)
(Hkkjrh; ekud C;wjks)
ubZ fnYYkh] 27 twu] 2014
dk-vk-
2438.—Hkkjrh; ekud C;wjks (izek.ku) fofu;e] 1988 ds fofu;e 4 ds mi&fofu;e (5) ds vuqlj.k esa Hkkjrh;
ekud C;wjks ,rn~}kjk vf/lwfpr djrk gS fd ftuds fooj.k uhps vuqlwph esa fn, x, gSa] dks ykblsal tkjh dj fn, x, gSa %µ
vuqlwph
Øe
ykblsal la-
tkjh djus
ikVhZ dk uke vkSj irk
ekud dk 'kh"kZd
Hkk-ek- la- Hkkx [k.M
o"kZ
la-
dh frfFk
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7) (8)
(9)
1-
2883678
8 ebZ] 2014
eSllZ vk;q"k bUMLVªht]
,d isQth NksVs ,lh vkSj
996
0
0
2009
8] eoMh IykWV] jktdksV]
;wuholZy fctyh dh eksVj
xqtjkr&360004
2-
2886381
15 ebZ] 2014
eSllZ frFkZ iEi bUMLVªht]
fueTtuh; iEi lsV
8034
0
0
2002
IykWV ua- 13] egknso bUMLVªh;y
,fj;k] egknso dk¯LVx ds ihNs]
dksBkfj;k lksYoUV] dksBkjh;k]
jktdksV] xqtjkr&360002
3-
2886684
15 ebZ] 2014
eSllZ fgrs'k csosjsthl]
iSdstcUn is; ty
14543
0
0
2004
guqekuth eafnj ds ikl]
(iSdstcUn izkÑfrd
xk¡o VhaoMh] eksjoh dPN gkbZos]
feujy ty ds vykok)
rkyqdk eksjch] jktdksV]
xqtjkr&363642
4-
2886987
16 ebZ] 2014
eSllZ lkxj iksfyVsdfud fyfeVsM]
bZfe¯Vx ikbZi lhLVe
13488
0
0
2008
IykWV ua- 109 ls 111]
ckeucksj thvkbZMhlh]
rkyqdk pksVhyk] xk¡o ckeuoksj]
ftyk lqjsUnzuxj] xqtjkr&363520
5-
2887585
19 ebZ] 2014
eSllZ xhrk oqM izksMDV~l]
ydM+h ds likV njokts ds
2202
1
0
1999
lsDVj 01] ÝysV ua- 3]
'kVj Bksl dksj Vkbi (Hkkx 1]
IykWV ua- 3] lR;e vikVZesUV]
IykbZoqM ds lrg ;qDr iYys
vksLyks ldZy] xka/h/ke]
ftyk dPN] xqtjkr 370201
6-
2887484
21 ebZ] 2014
eSllZ xhrk oqM izksMDV~l]
CykWd cksMZ
1659
0
0
2004
lsDVj 01] ÝysV ua- 3]
IykWV ua- 3] lR;e vikVZesUV]
vksLyks ldZy] xka/h/ke]
ftyk dPN] xqtjkr&370201
7-
2889690
29 ebZ] 2014
eSllZ jS;kjkt bysDVªhdYl
fueTtuh; iEi lsV
8034
0
0
2002
losZ ua- 234] lgtkuan bUMLVªh;y
,LVsV] eqjyh/j os czht LVªhV]
vkft ¯jx jksM] jk"Vªh; jktekxZ 8ch]
dksBkjh;k pksdMh ds ikl]
jktdksV] xqtjkr
¹la- vkj-ch-vks-@jkti=k@2014º
la- prqosZnh] oSKkfud ^,iQ* ,oa izeq[k
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6205
MINISTRY OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS, FOOD AND PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION
(Department of Consumer Affairs)
(Bureau of Indian Standards)
New Delhi, the 27th June, 2014
S.O. 2438.—In pursuance of sub-regulation (5) of regulation 4 of the Bureau of Indian Standards (Certificate)
Regulations, 1988, the Bureau of Indian Standards, hereby notifies the grant of licences particulars of which are given below
in the following schedule :
SCHEDULE
Sl.
Licence
Grant
Name and address of
Title of the Standard
IS No.
Part Sec.
Year
No.
No.
Date
the party
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
(9)
1.
2883678
8/5/2014
M/s. Ayush Industries,
Single-phase small AC
996
0
0
2009
8-Mavdi Plot, Rajkot,
and universal electric
Gujarat-360004
motors
2.
2886381
15/5/2014
M/s. Tirth Pump Industries,
Submersible Pumpsets-
8034
0
0
2002
Plot No.-13, Mahadev Ind. Area,
Specification
B/H Mahadev Casting,
Kothariya Solvant,
Kothariya, Rajkot,
Gujarart-360002
3.
2886684
15/5/2014
M/s. Hitesh Bevrages,
Packaged Drinking
14543
0
0
2004
Near Hanumanji Temple,
Water (other than
At Timbadi,
Packaged Natural
Morbi Kachchh Highway,
Mineral Water)-
Taluka Morbi, Rajkot,
Specification
Gujarat-363642
4.
2886987
16/5/2014
M/s. Sagar Ploytechnik Limited,
Emitting pipes system
13488
0
0
2008
Plot No. 109 to 111,
Bamanbore GIDC, Taluka Chotila,
At Village Bamanbore,
District : Surendranagar,
Gujarat-363520
5.
2887585
19/5/2014
M/s. Geeta Wood Products,
Specification for wooden 2202
1
0
1999
Sector-01, Flate No. 3,
flush door shutters
Plot No. 3, Satyam Apartment,
(solid core type) :
Oslo Circle, Gandhidham,
Part 1 Plywood
District : Kachchh,
face panels
Gujarat-370201
6.
2887484
21/5/2014
M/s. Geeta Wood Products,
Specification for block
1659
0
0
2004
Sector-1, Flat No. 3, Plot No. 3,
board
Satyam Apartment, Oslo Circle,
Gandhidham, District : Kachchh,
Gujarat-370201
7.
2889690
29/5/2014
M/s. Raiyaraj Electricals,
Submersible Pumpsets-
8034
0
0
2002
S. No. 234, Sahajanand Ind. Estate, Specification
Murlidhar Way Bridge Street,
Aji Ring Road, N.H. 8-B,
Near Kothariya Chokdi,
Rajkot, Gujarat
[No. RBO/Gazette/2014]
S. CHATURVEDI, Scientist ‘F’ and Head
6206
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
ubZ fnYYkh] 27 twu] 2014
dk-vk- 2439.—Hkkjrh; ekud C;wjks (izek.ku) fofu;e] 1988 ds fofu;e 4 ds mi&fofu;e 5 ds vuqlj.k esa Hkkjrh; ekud
C;wjks ,rn~}kjk vf/lwfpr djrk gS fd ftuds fooj.k uhps vuqlwph esa fn, x, gSa] ds ykblsal jí fd, x, gSa %µ
vuqlwph
Øe
ykblsal la-
ykbZlsal/kjh dk uke ,oa irk
ykblsal ds varxZr oLrq@izØe lEc¼
lekfIr dh frfFk
la-
Hkkjrh; ekud dk 'kh"kZd
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
1-
7441772
eSllZ osYlu csosjsthl ,.M iqQM~l
iSdstcan is; ty (iSdstcUn çkÑfrd
22 ebZ] 2014
losZ ua- 96] xkao fddek]
feujy ty ds vykok)
Hkqt vatkj jksM] ftyk dPN]
vkbZ-,l- 14543 % 2004
xqtjkr&370001
¹la- lh-,e-Mh-@13 % 11º
la- prqosZnh] oSKkfud ^,iQ* ,oa izeq[k
New Delhi, the 27th June, 2014
S.O. 2439.—In pursuance of sub-regulation (6) of regulation 5 of the Bureau of Indian Standards (Certificate)
Regulations, 1988, of the Bureau of Indian Standards, hereby notifies the grant of licences particulars of which are given
below have cancelled/suspended with effect from the date indicated against each :
SCHEDULE
Sl.
License No.
Name & Address of the Licensee
Article/Process with relevant Indian
Date of
No.
CM/L
Standards covered by the licence
Cancellation
cancelled/suspension
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
1.
7441772
Velson Beverages & Food
Packaged Drinking Water (other
22/05/2014
Survey No. 96, AT : Kikma,
than Packaged Natural Mineral
Bhuj Anjar Road, Taluka-Bhuj,
Water)-Specification
District : Kachchh,
Gujarat-370001
[No. CMD/13 : 11]
S. CHATURVEDI, Scientist ‘F’ and Head
ubZ fnYYkh] 29 vxLr] 2014
dk-vk-
2440.—Hkkjrh; ekud C;wjks fu;e 1987 ds fu;e 7 ds mifu;e (1) ds [kaM ([k) ds vuqlj.k esa Hkkjrh; ekud
C;wjks ,rn~}kjk vf/lwfpr djrk gS fd uhps vuqlwph esa fn;s x;s ekud (dksa) esa la'kks/u fd;k x;k@fd;s x;s gSa A
vuqlwph
Øe la- la'kksf/r Hkkjrh; ekud (dksa) dh la[;k] o"kZ vkSj 'kh"kZd
la'kks/u dh la[;k vkSj frfFk
lekfIr dh frfFk
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
1-
vkbZ,l 2347 % 2006 (ikapoka iqujh{k.k)
la'kks/u la[;k 2 flrEcj] 2014
29 uoEcj] 2014
2-
vkbZ,l 2418 (Hkkx 1) % 1977 (igyk iqujh{k.k)
la'kks/u la[;k 9 tqykbZ] 2014
2 ekpZ] 2015
3-
vkbZ,l 2418 (Hkkx 2) % 1977 (igyk iqujh{k.k)
la'kks/u la[;k 4 tqykbZ] 2014
2 ekpZ] 2015
4-
vkbZ,l 9079 % 2002
la'kks/u la[;k 2 ekpZ] 2014
2 ekpZ] 2015
5-
vkbZ,l 13252 (Hkkx 1) % 2010@vkbZbZlh 60950&1 % 2005
la'kks/u la[;k 1 twu] 2014
29 vxLr] 2014
(nwljk iqujh{k.k)
6-
vkbZ,l 15907 % 2010
la'kks/u la[;k 1 ekpZ] 2014
2 ekpZ] 2015
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6207
bl Hkkjrh; ekud dh izfr;ka Hkkjrh; ekud C;wjks] ekud Hkou] 9] cgknqj'kkg tiQj ekxZ] ubZ fnYyh&110002] {ks=kh; dk;kZy;ksa % ubZ
fnYyh] dksydrk] p.Mhx<+] psUubZ] eqEcbZ rFkk 'kk[kk dk;kZy;ksa % vgenkckn] caxykSj] Hkksiky] Hkqous'oj] dks;Ecrwj] xqokgkVh] gSnjkckn]
t;iqj] ukxiqj] iVuk] iw.ks rFkk dksfp esa fcØh gsrq miyC/ gSaA Hkkjrh; ekudksa dks http://www.standardsbis.in }kjk baVjusV ij [kjhnk tk
ldrk gS A
fnukad 29 vxLr] 2014
¹lanHkZ % ifCyd@th,u 2 % 2º
dyk ,e- okfj;j] funs'kd (fons'kh Hkk"kk ,oa izdk'ku)
New Delhi, the 29 August, 2014
S.O. 2440.—In pursuance of clause (b) of sub-rule (1) of Rule 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rules, 1987,
the Bureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies that amendments to the Indian Standards, particulars of which are given
in the Schedule hereto annexed have been issued :
SCHEDULE
Sl.
No. and year of the Indian Standards
No. and year of the amendment
Date from which
No.
the amendment
shall have effect
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
1.
IS 2347 : 2006 Domestic Pressure Cookers-
Amendment No. 2, September 2014
29 November, 2014
Specification (Fifth Revision)
2.
IS 2418 (Part 1) : 1977 Specification for Tubular
Amendment No. 9, July 2014
2 March, 2015
Fluorescent Lamps for General Lighting Service
Part 1 Requirement and Tests (First Revision)
3.
IS 2418 (Part 2) : 1977 Specification for Tubular
Amendment No. 4, July 2014
2 March, 2015
Fluorescent Lamps for General Lighting Service
Part 2 Standard Lamp Data Sheets (First Revision)
4.
IS 9079 : 2002 Electric Monoset Pumps for Clear
Amendment No. 2, March 2014
2 March, 2015
Cold Water for Agricultural and Water Supply
Purposes-Specification (Second Revision)
5.
IS 13252 (Part 1) : 2010/IEC 60950-1 : 2005
Amendment No. 1, June 2013
29 August, 2014
Information Technology Equipment - Safety
Part 1 General Requirements (Second Revision)
6.
IS 15907 : 2010 Agro Textiles - High Density
Amendment No. 1, March 2014
2 March, 2015
Polyethylene (HDPE) Woven Beds for
Vermiculture-Specification
Copy of these Standards are available for sale with the Bureau of Indian Standards, Manak Bhavan, 9, Bahadur
Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi-110 002 and Regional Offices:New Delhi, Kolcatta, Chandigarh, Chennai, Mumbai and also
Branch Offices: Ahmedabad, Bangalore, Bhopal, Bhubaneshwar, Coimbatore, Guwahati, Hyderabad, Jaipur, Nagpur, Patna,
Pune, Kochi.On line purchase of Indian Standard can be made at :http://www.standardsbis.in.
Date : 29th August, 2014
[Ref : PUB /GN 2:2]
KALA MADHAVI VARIAR, Director (Foreign Languages & Publications)
ubZ fnYYkh] 1 vxLr] 2014
dk-vk-
2441.—Hkkjrh; ekud C;wjks fu;e 1987 ds fu;e 7 ds mifu;e (1) ds [kaM ([k) ds vuqlj.k esa Hkkjrh; ekud
C;wjks ,rn~}kjk vf/lwfpr djrk gS fd ftu Hkkjrh; ekudksa ds fooj.k uhps vuqlwph esa fn, x, gSa] os LFkkfir gks x;s gSa A
vuqlwph
Øe
LFkkfir Hkkjrh; ekud (dksa) dh la[;k
LFkkfir frfFk
Hkkjrh; ekud(dksa) tks fd
jí gksus dh frfFk
la-
o"kZ vkSj 'kh"kZd
jí gksus gSa] vxj gSa] dh la[;k
o"kZ vkSj 'kh"kZd
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
1-
vkbZ-,l- 1956 (Hkkx 4) % 2013 ykSg ,oa
1 vxLr] 2014
vkbZ-,l- 1956 (Hkkx 4) % 1975
1 vxLr] 2014
bLikr ikfjHkkf"kd 'kCnkoyh Hkkx 4 LikV mRikn
(igyk iqujh{k.k)
(nwljk iqujh{k.k)
6208
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
2-
vkbZ-,l- 2796 % 2014 eksVj xSlksfyu&fof'k"V
1 vxLr] 2014
vkbZ-,l- 2796 % 2008 (prqFkZ
1 vxLr] 2014
(ikapoka iqujh{k.k)
iqujh{k.k)
3-
vkbZ-,l- 4880 (Hkkx 7) % 2014 ikuh ds izokg
1 vxLr] 2014
vkbZ-,l- 4880 (Hkkx 7) % 1975
1 vxLr] 2014
ds fy, lqjaxksa ds fMtkbZu dh jhfr lafgrk Hkkx 7 ]
bLikr vLrj.k okyh lajpuk fMtkbZu (igyk
iqujh{k.k)
4-
vkbZ-,l-@vkbZ-,l-vks- 5832&2 % 1999 'kY;
1 vxLr] 2014
vkbZ-,l- 5347 (Hkkx 3) % 1996
1 vxLr] 2014
fpfdRlk ds fy, izR;kjksi.k&/krq lkexzh Hkkx 2
vfefJr VkbVsfu;e
5-
vkbZ-,l-@vkbZ-,l-vks- 5832&3 % 1996 'kY;
1 vxLr] 2014
vkbZ-,l- 5347 (Hkkx 4) % 1996
1 vxLr] 2014
fpfdRlk ds fy, izR;kjksi.k&/krq lkexzh Hkkx 3
fiVokW VkbVsfu;e 6&,Y;qfefu;e 4&osusfM;e
feJ/krq
6-
vkbZ-,l-@vkbZ-,l-vks- 5832&5 % 2005 'kY;
1 vxLr] 2014
vkbZ-,l- 5347 (Hkkx 6) % 1996
1 vxLr] 2014
fpfdRlk ds fy, izR;kjksi.k&/krq lkexzh Hkkx 5
fiVokW dksckYV&Øksfe;e&VaxLVu&fudy
feJ/krq
7-
vkbZ-,l-@vkbZ-,l-vks- 5832&8 % 1997 'kY;
1 vxLr] 2014
vkbZ-,l- 5347 (Hkkx 12) % 1993
1 vxLr] 2014
fpfdRlk ds fy, izR;kjksi.k&/krq lkexzh Hkkx 8
fiVokW dksckYV&fudy&Øksfe;e&eksfycMsue
VaxLVu&yksg feJ/krq
8-
vkbZ-,l-@vkbZ-,l-vks- 5832&9 % 2007 'kY;
1 vxLr] 2014
vkbZ-,l- 5347 (Hkkx 13) % 1997
1 vxLr] 2014
fpfdRlk ds fy, izR;kjksi.k&/krq lkexzh Hkkx 9
fiVoka mPp ukbVªkstu LVsuysl LVhy
9-
vkbZ-,l- 9549 (Hkkx 2) % 2014 iQkLVuj&
1 vxLr] 2014
vkbZ-,l- 9549 % 1980
1 vxLr] 2014
cksYV LØw ,oa LVWM&cksYV ds gSM LykWV
(igyk iqujh{k.k)
10-
vkbZ-,l- 10980 (Hkkx 1) % 2014 vkbZ-,l-vks-
1 vxLr] 2014
vkbZ-,l- 10980 (Hkkx 1) %
1 vxLr] 2014
5855&1 % 1999 ok;q;ku&,e ts pwfM+;ka Hkkx 1
1984
lkekU; vis{kk,a (igyk iqujh{k.k)
11-
vkbZ-,l- 12207 % 2014 Ñf"k VSªDVj&pqus gq,
1 vxLr] 2014
vkbZ-,l- 12207 % 2007 (nwljk
1 vxLr] 2014
dk;Zdkfjrk ekin.Mksa dh fliQkfj'ksa (rhljk
iqujh{k.k)
iqujh{k.k)
12-
vkbZ-,l- 13365 (Hkkx 4) % 2014 'ky lagfr
1 vxLr] 2014
NA
NA
ek=kkRed ra=k&ekxZn'khZ fl¼kUr Hkkx 4 HkwxHkhZ;
lkeF;Z lwpdkad
13-
vkbZ-,l- 13599 % 2014 Lopy okgu&midj.k
1 vxLr] 2014
vkbZ-,l- 13599 % 1993
1 vxLr] 2014
ra=k&rkieku xst&fo|qr ,oa bysDVªkfud izdkj&
fof'kf"V (igyk iqujh{k.k)
14-
vkbZ-,l-@vkbZ-,l-vks- 13606&3 % 2009 LokLF;
1 vxLr] 2014
NA
NA
lwpuk foKku&bysDVªkWfud LokLF; fjdkMZ lapkj
Hkkx 3 lanHkZ ewy:i vkn'kZ ,oa 'kCn lwph
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6209
15-
vkbZ-,l- 13656 % 2014 vUrnZgu batuksa ds fy,
1 vxLr] 2014
vkbZ-,l- 13656 % 2002 (igyk
1 vxLr] 2014
ØSaddsl rsy (isVªksy vkSj Mh”ky)&fof'kf"V
iqujh{k.k)
(nwljk iqujh{k.k)
16-
vkbZ-,l- 13708 (Hkkx 1) % 2014@vkbZ-,l-vks-
1 vxLr] 2014
NA
NA
8729&1 % 2010 f'ki ,oa esjhu izkS|ksfxdh&esjhu
jMkj fjÝysDVj Hkkx 1 iSflo Vkbi (nwljk
iqujh{k.k)
17-
vkbZ-,l- 15408 % 2014@vkbZ-,l-vks- 15394 %
1 vxLr] 2014
vkbZ-,l- 15408 % 2003@
1 vxLr] 2014
2009 iSdstcanh&tgktjkuh] ifjogu vkSj xzkgh
vkbZ-,l-vks- 15394 % 2000
Lrjksa ds fy, vojks/ lafgrk vkSj f¼&vk;keh
izrhd (igyk iqujh{k.k)
18-
vkbZ-,l- 16144 % 2014 vukt HkaMkj.k
1 vxLr] 2014
NA
NA
xksnkeksa ds fy, jhfr lafgrk
19-
vkbZ-,l- 16146 % 2014 lulsV ;syks dh
1 vxLr] 2014
NA
NA
,Y;qfefu;e ysd] ,iQ lh ,iQ] [kk| xzsM&
fof'kf"V
20-
vkbZ-,l- 16172 % 2014 daØhV esa iz;qDr
1 vxLr] 2014
NA
NA
lfj;ksa ds ;kaf=kd laca/u gsrq izcyu ;qXed&
fof'kf"V
21-
vkbZ-,l- 16195 % 2014@vkbZ-,l-vks-@Vh-,l-
1 vxLr] 2014
NA
NA
15495 % 2010 nqX/] nqX/ mRikn ,oa f'k'kq
iQkewZys&,y lh&,e ,l@,e ,l }kjk esykekbu
vkSj lk;U;wfjd vEy ds ek=kkRed fu/kZj.k ds
fy, fn'kkfunsZ'k
22-
vkbZ-,l- 16219 % 2014 Lopy okgu&/krq
1 vxLr] 2014
NA
NA
dh b±/u Vadh&fof'kf"V
23-
vkbZ-,l- 16232 % 2014 ykSg izcfyr vk;ksMhuÑr 1 vxLr] 2014
NA
NA
ued&[kk| xzsM&fof'kf"V
24-
vkbZ-,l-@vkbZ-bZ-lh- 60050&415 % 1999 fo|qr
1 vxLr] 2014
NA
NA
rduhdh ikfjHkkf"kd 'kCnkoyh Hkkx 415 ok;q
Vjckbu tujsVj iz.kkfy;k¡
25-
vkbZ-,l-@vkbZ-bZ-lh- 61400&21 % 2008 ok;q
1 vxLr] 2014
NA
NA
Vjckbu Hkkx 21 fxzM ls tqMh ok;q Vjckbu ds
ikWoj xq.krk dk ekiu vkSj ewY;kadu
bl Hkkjrh; ekud dh izfr;ka Hkkjrh; ekud C;wjks] ekud Hkou] 9] cgknqj'kkg tiQj ekxZ] ubZ fnYyh&110002] {ks=kh; dk;kZy;ksa %
ubzZ fnYyh] dksydrk] p.Mhx<+] psUubZ] eqEcbZ rFkk 'kk[kk dk;kZy;ksa % vgenkckn] caxykSj] Hkksiky] Hkqous'oj] dks;Ecrwj] xqokgkVh] gSnjkckn]
t;iqj] iVuk] iw.ks rFkk dksfp esa fcØh gsrq miyC/ gSa A Hkkjrh; ekudksa dks http://www.standardsbis.in }kjk baVjusV ij [kjhnk tk ldrk
gS A
fnukad % 01-08-2014
¹lanHkZ % ic@th,u 1 % 1º
dyk ,e- okfj;j] funs'kd (fons'kh Hkk"kk ,oa izdk'ku)
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
6210
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
New Delhi, the 1st August, 2014
S.O. 2441.—In pursuance of Clause (b) of sub-rule (1) of Rules 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rules, 1987,
the Bureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies that the Indian Standards, particulars of which are given in the second
column of Schedule hereto annexed has been established on the date indicated against it in third column. The particulars of
the standards, if any, which are given in the fourth column shall also remain in force concurrently till they are cancelled on
the date indicated against them in the fifth column.
SCHEDULE
Sl.
No. & Year of the Indian Standards
Date of
No. & Year of the Indian
Date of
No.
Established
Establishment
Standards to be
cancellation
cancelled, if any
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
1.
IS 1956 (Part 4) : 2013 Glossary of Terms
01 August, 2014
IS 1956 (Part 4) : 1975
01 August, 2014
Relating to Iron and Steel - Part 4 Flat
(First Revision)
Products (Second Revision)
2.
IS 2796 : 2014 Motor Gasoline - Specification
01 August, 2014
IS 2796 : 2008
01 August, 2014
(Fifth Revision)
(Fourth Revision)
3.
IS 4880 Part 7 : 2014 Code of practice for
01 August, 2014
IS 4880 Part 7 : 1975
01 August, 2014
Design of tunnels conveying water part 7
Structural design of steel lining (First Revision)
4.
IS/ISO 5832-2 : 1999 Implants for surgery -
01 August, 2014
IS 5347 (Part 3) : 1996
01 August, 2014
Metallic materials - Part 2 : Unalloyed Titanium
5.
IS/ISO 5832-3 : 1996 Implants for surgery -
01 August, 2014
IS 5347 (Part 4) : 1996
01 August, 2014
Metallic materials Part 3: Wrought Titanium
6-Aluminium 4-Vanadium Alloy
6.
IS/ISO 5832-5 : 2005 Implants for surgery -
01 August, 2014
IS 5347 (Part 6) : 1996
01 August, 2014
Metallic materials - Part 5: Wrought Cobalt-
Chromium-Tungsten-Nickel Alloy
7.
IS/ISO 5832-8 : 1997 Implants for surgery -
01 August, 2014
IS 5347 (Part 12) : 1993
01 August, 2014
Metallic materials - Part 8 : Wrought Cobalt
Nickel-Chormium-Molybdenum-Tungsten-
Iron alloy
8.
IS/ISO 5832-9 : 2007 Implants for surgery -
01 August, 2014
IS 5347 (Part 13) : 1997
01 August, 2014
Metallic materials - Part 9 : Wrought High
Nitrogen Stainless Steel
9.
IS 9549 (Part 2) : 2014 Fasteners - Bolts,
01 August, 2014
IS 9549 : 1980
01 August, 2014
Screws and Studs - Head Slots for Bolts
(First Revision)
10.
IS 10980(Part 1) : 2014/ISO 5855-1 : 1999
01 August, 2014
IS 10980 (Part 1) : 1984
01 August, 2014
Aerospace - MJ threads Part 1 General
requirements (First Revision)
11.
IS 12207 : 2014 Agriculture Tractors -
01 August, 2014
IS 12207 : 2007
01 August, 2014
Recommendations on selected performance
(Second Revision)
Characteristics (Third Revision)
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6211
12.
IS 13365 (Part 4) : 2014 Quantitative Classification
01 August, 2014
NA
NA
of Rock Mass - Guidelines Part 4 Geological
Strength Index (GSI)
13.
IS 13599 : 2014 Automotive Vehicles - Instrument
01 August, 2014
IS 13599 : 1993
01 August, 2014
Systems - Temperature Gauges - Electrical and
Electronic Type - Specification (First Revision)
14.
IS/ISO 13606-3 : 2009 Health Informatics - Electronic 01 August, 2014
NA
NA
Health Record Communication Part 3 References
Archetypes and term Lists
15.
IS 13656 : 2014 Internal Combustion Engine
01 August, 2014
IS 13656 : 2002
01 August, 2014
Crankcase Oils for Automotive Application
(First Revision)
(Diesel & Gasoline) - Specification (Second
Revision)
16.
IS 13708 (Part 1) : 2014 / ISO 8729-1 : 2010 Ships
01 August, 2014
NA
NA
and Marine Technology - Marine Radar Reflectors :
Part 1 Passive Type (Second Revision)
17.
IS 15408 : 2014/ ISO 15394 : 2009 Packaging - Bar
01 August, 2014
IS 15408 : 2003 /
01 August, 2014
Code and Two - Dimensional Symbols for Shipping
ISO 15394 : 2000
Transport and Receiving labels (First Revision)
18.
IS 16144 : 2014 Foodgrain Storage Godowns -
01 August, 2014
NA
NA
Code of Practice
19.
IS 16146 : 2014 Aluminium Lake of Sunset Yellow
01 August, 2014
NA
NA
FCF Food Grade – Specification
20.
IS 16172 : 2014 Reinforcement Couplers for
01 August, 2014
NA
NA
Mechanical Splices of Bars in Concrete -
Specification
21.
IS 16195 : 2014 /ISO/TS 15495 : 2010 Milk,
01 August, 2014
NA
NA
Milk Products And Infant Formulae - Guidelines
for the Quantitative Determination of Melamine
and Cyanuric Acid by LC-MS/MS
22.
IS 16219 : 2014 Automotive Vehicles - Metallic
01 August, 2014
NA
NA
Fuel Tanks – Specification
23.
IS 16232 : 2014 Iron Fortified Iodized Salt (Double
01 August, 2014
NA
NA
Fortified Salt) - Food Grade – Specification
24.
IS/IEC 60050-415 : 1999 Electrotechnical Vocabulary 01 August, 2014
NA
NA
Part 415 Wind Turbine Generator Systems
25.
IS/IEC 61400-21 : 2008 Wind Turbines Part 21
01 August, 2014
NA
NA
Measurement and Assessment of Power Quality
Characteristics of Grid Connected Wind Turbines
Copies of these standards are available for sale with the Bureau of Indian Standards, Manak Bhavan, 9, Bahadur
Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi – 110002 and Regional Offices : Kolkata, Chandigarh, Chennai, Mumbai and also Branch
Offices: Ahmedabad, Bangalore, Bhopal, Bhubaneshwar, Coimbatore, Guwahati, Hyderabad, Jaipur, Nagpur, Patna, Pune,
Kochi.
Date : 1-8-2014
[Ref : PUB/GN-1 : 1]
KALA M. VARIAR, Director (Foreign Languages & Publications)
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
6212
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
Je vkSj jkstxkj ea=kky;
ubZ fnYYkh] 8 flrEcj] 2014
dk-vk-
2442.—dsUnz ljdkj] jktHkk"kk (la?k ds 'kkldh;
iz;kstuksa ds fy, iz;ksx) fu;e] 1976 (;Fkkla'kksfèkr] 1987) ds
fu;e 10 ds mi&fu;e (4) ds vuqlj.k esa] Je vkSj jkstxkj
ea=kky; ds iz'kkldh; fu;a=k.kkèkhu fuEufyf[kr dk;kZy;ksa dks]
ftuds 80 izfr'kr ls vfèkd deZpkfj;ksa us fgUnh dk dk;Zlkèkd
Kku izkIr dj fy;k gS] ,rn~}kjk vfèklwfpr djrh gS %
1- mi {ks=kh; dk;kZy;] deZpkjh jkT; chek fuxe] vEckyk
2- mi {ks=kh; dk;kZy;] deZpkjh jkT; chek fuxe] ejksy
3- 'kk[kk dk;kZy;] deZpkjh jkT; chek fuxe] deZiqjk
4- dk;kZy; vij dsUnzh; Hkfo"; fufèk vk;qDr] (gfj;k.kk ,oa
jktLFkku)] iQjhnkckn
5- dk;kZy; vij dsUnzh; Hkfo"; fufèk vk;qDr] (xqtjkr ,oa
eè; izns'k)] vgenkckn
6- dk;kZy; vij dsUnzh; Hkfo"; fufèk vk;qDr] (egkjk"Vª ,oa
NÙkhlx<+)] eqacbZ&1`
7- dk;kZy; vij dsUnzh; Hkfo"; fufèk vk;qDr] (dukZVd ,oa
xksok)] caxykSj
8- vkapfyd izf'k{k.k laLFkku (mÙkj {ks=k)] d-Hk-fu-la-]
iQjhnkckn
9- mi {ks=kh; dk;kZy;] d-Hk-fu-la-] bykgkckn (mÙkj izns'k)
10- mi {ks=kh; dk;kZy;] d-Hk-fu-la-] f'koeksxk (dukZVd)
11- mi {ks=kh; dk;kZy;] d-Hk-fu-la-] fpDdeaxywj (dukZVd)
12- mi {ks=kh; dk;kZy;] d-Hk-fu-la-] csYykjh (dukZVd)
13- mi {ks=kh; dk;kZy;] d-Hk-fu-la-] eSlwj jksM (dukZVd)
14- mi {ks=kh; dk;kZy;] d-Hk-fu-la-] ds-vkj- iqje (caxykSj)
15- mi {ks=kh; dk;kZy;] d-Hk-fu-la-] oqQDdViYyh] (gSnjkckn)
¹la- bZ&11017@1@2006&jk-Hkk-uh-º
,-osQ- i.Mk] vk£Fkd lykgdkj
MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT
New Delhi, the 8th September, 2014
S.O.
2442.—In pursuance of Sub-Rule (4) of Rule
10 of the Official Languages (Use for official purposes of
the Union) Rules, 1976 (as amended, 1987) the Central
Government hereby notifies following offices under the
administrative control of the Ministry of Labour and
Employment, more than 80% Staff whereof have acquired
working knowledge of Hindi :—
1. Sub Regional Office, ESIC, Ambala
2. Sub Regional Office, ESIC, Marol
3. Branch Office, ESIC, Karmpura
4. Office of Additional Central P.F. Comm., (Haryana
and Rajasthan), Faridabad
5. Office of Additional Central P.F. Comm., (Gujrat and
Madhya Pradesh), Ahmedabad
6. Office of Additional Central P.F. Comm., (Maharastra
and Chhattisgarh), Mumbai-1
7. Office of Additional Central P.F. Comm., (Karnatak
and Goa), Bangalore
8. Zonal Training Istitute (North Zone), EPFO,
Faridabad
9. Sub Regional Office, EPFO, Allahabad, (UP)
10. Sub Regional Office, EPFO, Shivmoga (Karnatak)
11. Sub Regional Office, EPFO, Chikkmangalore (Karnatak)
12. Sub Regional Office, EPFO, Bellari (Karnatak)
13. Sub Regional Office, EPFO, Mysore Road (Karnatak)
14. Sub Regional Office, EPFO, K.R. Puram (Bangalore)
15. Sub Regional Office, EPFO, Kukkatpalli (Hyderabad)
[No. E-11017/1/2006-RBN]
A. K. PANDA, Economic Adviser
ubZ fnYyh] 1 flrEcj] 2014
dk-vk- 2443-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947
dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj ch-lh-lh-,y-
ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp vuqcaèk
esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k@Je
U;k;ky; ua- 1] èkuckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 64@2008) dks
izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 1@9@2014 dks izkIr gqvk
FkkA
¹la- ,y&20012@91@2008&vkbZ-vkj- (lh,e&I)º
,e- osQ- ¯lg] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh
New Delhi, the 1st September, 2014
S.O. 2443.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 64/2008)
of the Cent. Govt. Indus. Tribunal-cum-Labour Court No
1, Dhanbad as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial
Dispute between the management of M/s. BCCL and their
workmen, received by the Central Government on 1/9/2014.
[No. L-20012/91/2008-IR (CM-I)]
M. K. SINGH, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL (NO. 1), DHANBAD
In the Matter of A Reference U/S 10(1) (D) (2A) of
I.D. Act, 1947.
Ref. No. 64 of 2008
Employers in relation to the management of
Sijua Area of M/s. BCCL
AND
Their workmen
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6213
Present : Sri Ranjan Kumar Saran, Presiding officer
Appearances:
For the Employers
: Sri D.K.Verma, Advocate
For the workman
: Sri R.R.Ram, Advocate
State : Jharkhand
Industry : Coal.
Dated. 28 /07/2014
AWARD.
By Order No.L-20012/91/2008-IR -(CM-I), dated
18/12/2008, the Central Government in the Ministry of
Labour has, in exercise of the powers conferred by clause
(d) of sub-section (1) and sub –section (2A) of Section 10
of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, referred the following
disputes for adjudication to this Tribunal:
SCHEDULE
“Whether the action of the management of Sendra
Bansjora Colliery under Sijua Area of M/s. BCCL in
dismissing Shri Jageshwar Bhuia, Miner/Loader from
the services of the company w.e.f. 20.08.2004 is legal
and justified? (ii) To what relief is the concerned
workman entitled?”
2.
The case is received from the Ministry of Labour on
29.12.2008. After receipt of reference , both parties are
noticed, the Sponsoring Union files their written statement
on 04/01/12. And the management files their written
statement -cum-rejoinder on 04.12.2012. The point involved
in the reference is that the workman has been dismissed
from his services on absenteeism ground .
3.
During preliminary hearing it is revealed that, this
case is dismissal of workman for long absence on duty.
He has already out of service for 10 years. It is felt to give
another chance to the workman to serve.
4.
Considering the facts and circumstances of this case,
I hold that he be taken into job as a fresh employee. But
the workman be kept under probation for a period two
year. At the time of appointment his identity is to be
scrutinised by the management. Therefore the question
of back wages does not arise at all.
This is my award.
R. K. SARAN, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 1 flrEcj] 2014
dk-vk- 2444-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947
dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj lh-lh-,y- ds
izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp vuqcaèk esa
fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k@Je
U;k;ky; ua- 1] èkuckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 67@2008) dks
izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 1@9@2014 dks izkIr gqvk
FkkA
¹la- ,y&20012@69@2004&vkbZvkj (lh,e&I)º
,e- osQ- ¯lg] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh
New Delhi, the 1st September, 2014
S.O. 2444.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 67/2008)
of the Cent. Govt. Indus. Tribunal-cum-Labour Court
No. 1, Dhanbad as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial
Dispute between the management of M/s. CCL and their
workmen, received by the Central Government on 1/9/2014.
[No. L-20012/69/2004-IR (CM-I)]
M. K. SINGH, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO. 1, DHANBAD.
In the matter of reference U/S. 10 (1) (d) (2A) of
I.D.Act, 1947
Ref. No. 67 of 2004
Employer in relation to the management of
Karo O.C.P M/s. CCL
AND
Their workmen.
Present : Sri Ranjan Kumar Saran, Presiding Officer.
Appearances :
For the Employers
: Sri D.K.Verma, Advocate
For the workman
: Sri S.N. Goswami, Advocate
State : Jharkhand
Industry : Coal
Dated 24/7/2014
AWARD
By Order No.L-20012/69/2004-IR (CM-I), dated.Nil,
the Central Government in the Ministry of Labour has, in
exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of sub-
section (1) and sub –section (2A) of Section 10 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, referred the following
disputes for adjudication to this Tribunal:
SCHEDULE
“Whether the demand of Hind Mazdoor Kishan
Panchayat from the management of Karo OCP of
M/s. CCL for promotion of Sri Sonu Ram Mahato ,
Shoval Operator Grade-II/B w.e.f. 27.7.1988 and
Grade-I/A w.e.f. 27.7.89 is legal and justified? If so,
to what relief the workman concerned is entitled to?”
2.
This Case is received from the Ministry of Labour &
Employment on 12.07.2004. After receipt of reference, both
parties are noticed. The workman files their written
statement on 27.12.2004. The management files their written
statement on 31.03.2005. One witness each has been
examined from both side.
3.
The short point to be decided in this reference is ,
whether the concerned workman will get promotional scale
so also grade at par with his junior Daya Shankar Singh
who is in higher in scale than the concerned workman.
6214
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
4.
The case of the workman is that he alongwith Daya
Shankar completed training as Shoval Operator and passed
the training and Daya Shankar Singh has been given higher
grade debarring the present workman.
5.
On the other hand the management in his counter
submitted that the workman did not file his pass certificate
of Shovel Operator for which his case has not been
considered.
6.
Therefore it is ordered that the workman to file his
trainee pass certificate before the authority and the
authority after receipt of the same consider and give proper
grade to the workman .
This is my award.
R. K. SARAN, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 1 flrEcj] 2014
dk-vk- 2445-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947
dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj ch-lh-lh-,y-
ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp
vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd
vfèkdj.k@Je U;k;ky; ua- 1] èkuckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k
53@1992) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 1@9@2014
dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&20012@204@1991&vkbZvkj (lh&I)º
,e- osQ- ¯lg] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh
New Delhi, the 1st September, 2014
S.O. 2445.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 53/1992)
of the Cent. Govt. Indus. Tribunal-cum-Labour Court No
1, Dhanbad as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial
Dispute between the management of M/s. BCCL and their
workmen, received by the Central Government on 1/9/2014.
[No. L-20012/204/1991-IR (C-I)]
M. K. SINGH, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO. 1, DHANBAD.
In the matter of reference U/S 10 (1) (d) (2A)
of I.D.Act, 1974
Ref. No. 53 of 1992
Employer in relation to the management
of Moonidih Area, M/s. BCCL,
AND
Their workmen.
Present : Sri Ranjan Kumar Saran, Presiding Officer.
Appearances :
For the Employers
: None
For the workman
: None
State : Jharkhand
Industry : Coal.
Dated 28/07/2014
AWARD
By Order No.L-20012/204/1991-IR (C-I), dated
20/07/1992, the Central Government in the Ministry of
Labour has, in exercise of the powers conferred by clause
(d) of sub-section (1) and sub –section (2A) of Section 10
of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, referred the following
disputes for adjudication to this Tribunal:
SCHEDULE
“Whether the action of the management of M/s. Bharat
Coking Coal Ltd., Koyla Bhawan, Dhanbad in
denying promotion to all the 28 Foremen
(Mechanical) as mentioned in the annexure as per
their old Seniority and old promotional policy of the
above management is justified? If not , to what relief
the above workmen are entitled and from what date?”
Sl. No.
Name of workman
1.
Shri Tripurari Bandopadhya
2.
Sri S.L.P.Singh.
3.
Shri Sarbeswar Banerjee
4.
Sri Prasanta Kumar Mitra
5.
Shri K. K. Kachahe
6.
Sri K.B. Roy
7.
Shri Ramesh Pandit
8.
Sri S. D. Ram
9.
Shri U. S. Singh
10.
Shri H. L. Manjhi
11.
Shri G. P. Sahay
12.
Sri N. K. Prasad
13.
Shri Jitendra Kumar
14.
Shri Soumitra Bakshi
15.
Shri D.K.Chatopadhyay
16.
Shri Anil Gorai
17.
Shri M.K.Choudhary
18.
Sri V.K. Chourasia
19.
Sri N. K. Viswakarma
20.
Shri B.D. Mishra
21.
Shri S.K.Lahira
22.
Shri Mahimanand Sharma
23.
Shri Mondal Pharindra Chandra
24.
Shri Narendra Prasad
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6215
25.
Sri S. K. Roy
26.
Shri T. K. Das
27.
Md. Jamil Ahmad
28.
Sri Seo Shankar Yadav.
2.
After receipt of the reference, parties are noticed,
Though they took steps for certain dates, the management
and workman examined two evidence each and marked
document as exhibits. But subsequently the parties did
not appear nor take any interest in the case. It is presumed
that the disputes between the parties have resolved in
the meantime, Hence No Dispute Award is passed.
This is my award.
R. K. SARAN, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 1 flrEcj] 2014
dk-vk- 2446-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947
dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj ch-lh-lh-,y-
ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp
vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd
vfèkdj.k@Je U;k;ky; ua- 1] èkuckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 30@
2005) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 1@9@2014 dks
izkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&20012@223@2004&vkbZvkj (lh&I)º
,e- osQ- ¯lg] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh
New Delhi, the 1st September, 2014
S.O. 2446.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 30 of
2005) of the Cent. Govt. Indus. Tribunal-cum-Labour Court
No. 1, Dhanbad as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial
Dispute between the management of M/s. BCCL and their
workmen, received by the Central Government on 1/9/2014.
[No. L-20012/223/2004-IR (C-I)]
M. K. SINGH, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL (NO. 1), DHANBAD.
In the matter of reference U/S 10 (1) (d) (2A)
of I.D. Act. 1974
LOK ADALAT
Ref. No. 30 of 2005
Employers in relation to the management
of Katras Area, M/S BCCL
AND
Their workmen
Present : Sri Ranjan Kumar Saran, Presiding officer
Appearances :
For the Employers
: Shri D.K.Verma, Advocate
For the workman
: Shri K.N.singh, Rep.
State : Jharkhand
Industry : Coal
Dated. 14/7/2014
AWARD
By Order No.L-20012/223/2004-IR (C-I), dated
31/03/2005, the Central Government in the Ministry of
Labour has, in exercise of the powers conferred by clause
(d) of sub-section (1) and sub –section (2A) of Section 10
of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, referred the following
disputes for adjudication to this Tribunal:
SCHEDULE
“ Whether the demand of the Janta Mazdoor Sangh
from the management of BCCL Katras Area that
Shri Ram Lal , Miner Loader may be regularized as
Dresser/Compounder is justified? If so, to what relief
is the workman entitled and from what date?
2.
The case is received from the Ministry of Labour on
25.04.2005. The workman files their written statement on
13.06.2005. Thereafter the management files their written
statement on 14.09.2005 , Document and rejoinder is also
filed by the workman. Workman examined himself as
WW-1.
3.
During the pendency of this case the dispute
between the parties settled and order of regularization
already filed in court. The said copy along with the award
is submitted.
This is my award.
R. K. SARAN, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 1 flrEcj] 2014
dk-vk- 2447-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947
dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj ch-lh-lh-,y-
ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp
vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd
vfèkdj.k@Je U;k;ky; ua- 2] èkuckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k
192@2001) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 1@9@2014
dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&20012@147@2001&vkbZvkj (lh&I)º
,e- osQ- ¯lg] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh
New Delhi, the 1st September, 2014
S.O. 2447.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 192/
2001) of the Cent. Govt. Indus. Tribunal-cum-Labour Court
6216
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
No. 2, Dhanbad as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial
Dispute between the management of M/s. BCCL and their
workmen, received by the Central Government on 1/9/2014.
[No. L-20012/147/2001-IR (C-I)]
M. K. SINGH, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL (NO. 2), AT DHANBAD
PRESENT : Shri Kishori Ram, Presiding Officer.
In the matter of an Industrial Dispute under Section
10(1)(d) of the I.D. Act,1947
REFERENCE No. 192 OF 2001
PARTIES
: The Orgn.Secretary,
National Coal Workers Congress,
SE.M. 7/144, Mathigarh,
Dam Colony, PO : Nudkhurkee, Dhanbad
Vs.
General Manager,
Western Jharia Area of M/s. BCCL,
PO : Moonidih, Dhanbad.
Order No. L-20012/147/2001-IR(C-I) dt.10.07.2001
APPEARANCES :
On behalf of the Workman/Union : None
On behalf of the Management
: Mr. D. K. Verma,
Ld. Advocate
State : Jharkhand
Industry : Coal
Dated, Dhanbad, the 30th July, 2014
AWARD
The Government of India, Ministry of Labour, in
exercise of the powers conferred on them under
Sec.10(1)(d) of the I.D. Act,1947 has referred the following
dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication vide their Order
No. L-20012/147/2001-IR(C-I) dt.10.07.2001
SCHEDULE
“Whether the action of the Management to dismiss
the services of Sri Sheo Prasad Sahu of Lohapatti
Colliery under Western Jharia Area w.e.f. 16.3.2000
is justified, legal and proper? If not, to what relief is
the concerned workman entitled ?
2.
Neither the Representative for the National Coal
Workers. SE.M.7/144, Mathigarh, Dam Colony, Nudkhurkee,
Dhanbad nor workman Sheo Pd. Sahu appeared despite
registered notices as a last chance for his appearance. But
Mr. D. K. Verma, Ld. Advocate for the O.P./Management
is present. No Management witness for the O.P. at the
preliminary point produced.
From the perusal of the case record, It appears
neither the Union Representative nor the workman has
appeared since 29.7.2013. Both of them by their conduct
appear to be uninterested to pursue their case despite the
Registered Notices having been issued on 27.5.2013,
26.12.2013 and 28.03.2014.
Under these circumstances, the Reference related
to an issue over the dismissal of the workman is closed as
‘No Industrial Dispute’ existent. Accordingly an order of
“No Industrial Dispute” is passed.
KISHORI RAM, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 1 flrEcj] 2014
dk-vk- 2448-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947
dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj ch-lh-lh-,y-
ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp
vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd
vfèkdj.k@Je U;k;ky; ua- 2] èkuckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k
69@2005) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 1@9@2014
dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&20012@18@2005&vkbZvkj (lh&I)º
,e- osQ- ¯lg] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh
New Delhi, the 1st September, 2014
S.O. 2448.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 69/2005)
of the Cent. Govt. Indus. Tribunal-cum-Labour Court
No. 2, Dhanbad as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial
Dispute between the management of M/s. BCCL and their
workmen, received by the Central Government on 1/9/2014.
[No. L-20012/18/2005-IR (C-I)]
M. K. SINGH, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL (NO. 2), AT DHANBAD
PRESENT : Shri Kishori Ram, Presiding Officer
In the matter of an Industrial Dispute under
Section 10(1)(d) of the I.D.Act,1947.
REFERENCE NO 69 OF 2005
PARTIES
: The Working President,
Janta Mazdoor Sangh,
B-25, Murlidih, 20/21 Pits,
PO Mahuda, Dhanbad
Vs.
The General Manager,
W.W.Zone of Mahuda of
M/s. BCCL, PO : Mahuda, Dhanbad.
Order No. L-20012/18/2005-IR(C-I) dt.19.07.2005
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6217
APPEARANCES :
On behalf of the Workman/Union : Mr. S. C. Gaur,
Ld. Advocate
On behalf of the Management
: Mr. U. N. Lal,
Ld. Advocate
State : Jharkhand
Industry : Coal
Dated, Dhanbad, the 25th July, 2014
AWARD
The Government of India, Ministry of Labour, in
exercise of the powers conferred on them under
Sec.10(1)(d) of the I.D. Act,1947 has referred the following
dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication vide their Order
No. L-20012/18/2005-IR(C-I) dt.19.07.2005
SCHEDULE
“Whether the action of the Management of
Moonidih Coal Washery of M/s BCCL in not
correcting the date of birth of Sri Naresh Paswan as
15.11.68 instead of 15.5.1955 is justified? If not, to
what relief is the concerned workman entitled?”
On receipt of the Order No. L-20012/18/2005-IR(C-I)
dt.19.07.2005 of the above mentioned reference from the
Government of India, Ministry of Labour & Employment,
New Delhi for adjudication of the dispute, the Reference
Case No. 69 of 2005 was registered on 19th August, 2005
and accordingly an order to that effect was passed to
issue notices through the Registered Posts to the parties
concerned, directing them to appear in the Court on the
date fixed, and to file their written statements along with
the relevant documents. In pursuance of the said order,
notices by the Registered Posts were sent to the parties
concerned.
Both the parties made their appearances and filed
their pleadings and photocopies of their documents. The
workman and the O.P./Management through their Lawyers
appeared in, and contested the case.
2.
The case of petitioner Naresh Paswan as sponsored
by the Janta Mazdoor Sangh is that while his appointment
as the workman of Moonidih Coal Washery on 23.12.1989,
his age was recorded as 15.11.1968 as his date of birth
(DoB) in his declaration and Identification in the prescribed
proforma of the BCCL,but the Management of the said
Washery recorded his date of birth as 15.5.1955 instead of
15.11.1968 in his form ‘B’ Record without any authentic
document, though he had submitted his Admit Card and
Mark Sheet of Bihar School Examination Board, and the
Certificate issued by S.B. High School, Bhaga, Dhanbad
for correcting of his DoB as per his application
dt.13.07.2004,but the Management as per their letter
No.1982 dt.10.08.2004 refused to correct it by not
considering his Pan Card and L.I.C. bearing his date of
birth as 15.11.1968.
Further, it is alleged that the petitioner Workman
was medically examined by the Medical Board on
14.11.1989 before his aforesaid employment, but the age
column of the Form ‘O’ rule 29(F) (2) and 29 (L) of the
Medical Report was unfilled by the members of the Medical
Board which was treated as “No age assessed afresh”.
His service excerpt duly checked and signed by the
Personnel Manager of the said Washery and the workman
was left blank under its column of date of birth. When the
workmen petitioner wanted to fill up his age in the column
of it, he was not allowed by the Management to do so.
The Management failed to produce any documents
concerned related to his Date of Birth 15.5.1955 as recorded
in course of the conciliation proceeding as sponsored by
the Union before the ALC©,and on its failure resulted in
the reference for an adjudication. Due to the wrongly
recording of his date of birth by the Management in their
record, the workman/petitioner would superannuate on
14.5.2015, 13 years before his actual superannuation on
14.11.2028 at 60 years of his age. The malafide action of
the Management of the said washery was illegal,
unjustified and unfair labour practice. So the workman
petitioner is entitled to correction of his aforesaid age
under the provision of I.I. No.76 of the J.B.C.C.I. of the
National Coal Wages Board Agreement.
3.
The Union concerned in its rejoinder for the
petitioner has categorically denied all the allegations of
the O.P./Management.
4.
On the other hand, categorically denying all the
allegations of the workman petitioner, the case of the O.P./
Management is that Sri Naresh Paswan was appointed as
Auto Fitter Helper w.e.f. 23.12.1989 as per the offer of
appointment No.5055 (A) dt.4.9.1989. He was transferred
from other unit to Moonidih Coal Washery. As per his
L.P.C., Form ‘B’, NEIS etc., his date of birth was recorded
as 15.5.1955 which was correct. The Management as per
the letter dt.10.8.2004 of the Project Officer, Moonidih Coal
Washery had accordingly replied him about his aforesaid
date of birth as correct. The action of the Management of
the said washery, M/s. BCCL is correct and fair. The claim
of the petitioner for rectification of his Date of birth as
15.11.1968 at later stage is neither just nor viable as per
policy and decision of the Management.
In the rejoinder, the O.P./Management has
specifically alleged that all those documents of the
workman concerned are not of the time of his joining the
service, were not referred by him at the relevant time, rather,
he submitted a copy of the Marks Sheet which was
obtained from the Bihar School Examination Board on
14.9.2004. It is not reasonable. The date of his birth as
recorded in the Statutory record is to be treated as perfectly
in order and it is acceptable to all. Accordingly, the workman
would retire at his age of 60 years as per his record and in
the Form’B’ which is the mother record of the Company.
FINDING WITH REASONS
5.
In the instant reference,WWI Naresh Paswan, the
workman petitioner himself for the Union concerned, MWI
Anna Bhauwra, the Chief Manager (Pers.), Mahuda
6218
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
Washery Zone, and MW2 Sanjeev Kumar, the Sr. Clerk of
the said Washery of the O.P./Management have been
respectively examined.
Mr. S.C. Gaur, the Learned Counsel for the petitioner
as per his written argument as well submitted that the
appointment of the workman to the post of Auto Fitter
Helper and his report with a direction to report the G.M.,
Moonidih Area for his duty as per the appointment Letter
dt.4.9.1989 and the Office Order dt.01.1.1990 (Extt.W.1 and
2 respectively) are indisputable; his service particulars
including his Date of birth as 15.11.1968 was filed in the
Form- B of the Moonidih Project as per the provision u/s
48 of the Mines Act, 1952; on his transfer to Moonidih
Coal Washery, the Service Excerpt and Identity Card (Exts.
3 & 6/1 respectively) issued by the Management to him
show his Date of Birth as 15.11.1968, but statement of
MW2 over the entry of Date of Birth as improper suggests
the recording of his Date of Birth was not correct. But the
Service Excerpt (Ext.W.3) of the workman refers to the blank
against the column no.6 (1) of his Date of Birth. According
to Mr. Gaur, the Learned Counsel for the workman, the
Management has intentionally not produced the original
Form B of the Moonidih Project related to the workman’s
initial appointment and service particulars including his
Date of Birth as 25.11.1968;in such situation, the date of
birth recorded in the School Leaving Certificate which is
not be altered under any circumstances as per the
Mandatory Implementation Instruction No.76 dt.25th
April,1988 of the NCWA- III, so the DoB of the workman
as recorded in his Identity Card, his School Leaving Papers
& Pan Card (Exts. W.6/1, 4/1 and 6 respectively) is correct,
but any other age secretly recorded by the Management
can not taken as a certain proof of recording his correct
Date of Birth which was willingly done with a view to
retire him 13 years prior to actual superannuation; and the
action of the Management in not correcting the wrong
Date of Birth of the workman is illegal and unjustified, so
the workman is entitled to recording his Date of Birth as
above as per his document (Ext.W.6/1) in particular.
6.
Whereas the contention of Mr.U.N.Lal, Learned
Advocate for the OP/Management, as per his written
argument as well is that though the Service Excerpt
(Ext.M.1) of the workman bears blank against its column
No.6 (1) of date of birth just as the Certified Copy of Identity
Card under Sl.No. 718 of the Form B, issued on 28.08.1990
(Ext.M.7 with objection) he did not raise any objection
and his present Identity Card (Ext.6/1) is dt.11.12.2006
which is quite different. On his transfer to Moonidih in the
year 1990 as per his LPC (Ext.M.3) his Form ‘B’(Ext.M.2)
proves his age as 15.05.1955 against its column No.4 under
the signature of the workman as well, and accordingly, the
sheet of the date maintained in the NEIS dt.06.05.1994 under
the signature of the Personnel Manager of aforesaid Coal
Washery (Ext.M.6) shows his aforesaid date of birth. The
Project Officer of the Washery as per the letter dt.2.8.2004
to the workman as also the letter dt.8.11.2004 to the
A.L.C.(C), Dhanbad (Exts. M. 4 and 5 respectively) had
communicated about the date of birth of the workman as
15.05.1955 as correct, so his prayer for its correction was
refused; moreover the statement of MWI Aruna Bhauwra
proves no variation in the date of birth of the workman in
the statutory records of the Company, so the claim of the
workman for correction of his Date of Birth is baseless.
7.
Having gone through all the materials as brought
by both the portion on the case record, I find that it is the
settled law as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the
case of Awadh Singh Vs. M/s B.C.C.L. reported in 2005 (3)
JWJR.209 (DB) that “There is no dispute that under the
Implementation Instruction No.76, the Age determination
is to be done at the time of appointment firstly on the
basis of Matriculation Certificate, if available. In fact, the
said Instruction indicates that in the case of appointees
who have passed Matriculation or equivalent examination,
the date of birth recorded in the said Certificate shall be
treated as correct date of birth and the same cannot be
altered under any circumstances.(Para -6)”.
But the main decisive factor evolves whether the
workman/applicant had submitted his School Certificate
even of his failure at the time of his appointment. The
answer comes negative as apparent from his documents
of Transfer Certificate, photocopy of Bihar School
Examination Board and Marks Sheet dt.14.09.2004 (Ext.W.4
series)which were palpably antidatedly obtained much later
than his appointment in the year 1989, and his claim for
correction of Date of Birth as 15.11.1968 started since 2004.
So far as the Identity Card of the workman (Ext.W.6/1)
over which he has finally relied is concerned, it also seems
evidently tampered with its date, hence it is a concocted
one against his original Date of Birth as 15.05.1955 as
maintained the statutory records of the O.P./Management.
In result, it is hereby, in the terms of the reference
responded and awarded that the action of the Management
of Moonidih Coal Washery of M/s BCCL in not correcting
the date of birth of Sri Naresh Paswan as 15.11.1968 instead
of 15.5.55 is quite legal and justified. The workman
concerned is not entitled to any relief whatsoever.
KISHORI RAM, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 1 flrEcj] 2014
dk-vk- 2449-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947
dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj ch-lh-lh-,y-
ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp
vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd
vfèkdj.k@Je U;k;ky; ua- 2] èkuckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k
29@2000) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 1@9@2014
dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&20012@312@1999&vkbZvkj (lh&I)º
,e- osQ- ¯lg] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6219
New Delhi, the 1st September, 2014
S.O. 2449.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 29/2000)
of the Cent. Govt. Indus. Tribunal-cum-Labour Court
No. 2, Dhanbad as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial
Dispute between the management of M/s. BCCL and their
workmen, received by the Central Government on 1/9/2014.
[No. L-20012/312/1999-IR (C-I)]
M. K. SINGH, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL (NO. 2) AT DHANBAD
PRESENT : Shri KISHORI RAM, Presiding Officer
In the matter of an Industrial Dispute under
Section 10(1)(d) of the I.D. Act, 1947
REFERENCE NO. 29 OF 2000
PARTIES
: Shri Dilip Chakraborty,
Area Secretary,
Bihar Colliery Kamgar Union,
At/PO: Bhowra, Distt; Dhanbad,
Vs.
The Project Officer,
Bhowra (N) Colliery, PO: Bhowra,
Distt. Dhanbad
Ministry’s Order No. L-20012/312/99-IR (C-I) dt.28.1.2000
APPEARANCES :
On behalf of the Workman/Union : Mr. S.N. Goswami,
Ld. Advocate
On behalf of the Management
: None
State : Jharkhand
Industry : Coal
Dated, Dhanbad, the 14th July, 2014
AWARD
The Government of India, Ministry of Labour, in
exercise of the powers conferred on them under
Sec.10(1)(d) of the I.D. Act,1947 has referred the following
dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication vide their
Ministry’s Order No. L-20012/312/99-IR (C-I) dt.28.1.2000.
SCHEDULE
“Whether the action of the Management of Bhowra
(N) Colliery of the M/s BCCL in dismissing Sri Hiroo
Turi from the services of the company w.e.f.
26.10.1996 is justified? If not, to what reliefs the
workman is entitled to?”
On receipt of the Order No. L-20012/312/99-IR(C-I)
dt.28.1.2000 of the above mentioned reference from the
Government of India, Ministry of Labour & Employment,
New Delhi for adjudication of the dispute, the Reference
Case No. 29/2000 was registered on 01.03.2000 and
accordingly an order to that effect was passed to issue
notices through the Registered Posts to the parties
concerned, directing them to appear in the Court on the
date fixed, and to file their written statements along with
the relevant documents. In pursuance of the said order,
notices by the Registered Posts were sent to the parties
concerned.
Both the parties made their appearances and filed
their pleadings and photocopies of their documents. The
Union and the O.P./Management through their Advocates
and contested the case, respectively.
2.
The case of the sponsoring Bihar Colliery Kamgar
Union, Bhowra for workman Hiroo Turi is that he is a
permanent employee of Bhowra U.G. Mine Colliery, Bhowra
Area No. XI of M/s. BCCL. He has been unblemishedly
working as D.C.Loader. Due to his illness of Jaundice, he
had been under treatment as being in beyond control
circumstances, he could not report his duty w.e.f. 16.3.1996.
On his recovery from his ailment, when he submitted his
Medical Certificate to report his duty, he was not allowed
to join his duty, so he remained idle since then. He was
issued the charge sheet dt.21.6.1996 for his unauthorised
absence from duty under clause 26.1.1 and 26.1.10 of the
Certified Standing Order of M/s BCCL. He submitted his
explanation of illness beyond his control, yet the
departmental enquiry was hastily and biasedly conducted
by the Management without giving his reasonable
opportunity for defence against the principle of natural
justice, as also no copy of the enquiry proceeding was
supplied to him. The report of the Enquiry Officer was
perverse, and the order of his dismissal dt.26.10.1996 based
on it was disproportionate and not commensurate with
the misconduct, so liable to be set aside. He also submitted
his appeal to the Management for resumption of his duty,
but of no effect. The action of the Management in
dismissing the workman is not justified. The workman is
entitled to reinstatement in service with full back wages
and other consequential benefits.
3.
The workman in his rejoinder on his behalf itself has
categorically denied the allegations of the O.P./
Management, further alleging that the Project Officer is
neither the Appointing Authority nor the Disciplinary
Authority, so the issuance of the chargesheet and the
appointment of the Enquiry Officer are beyond his
jurisdiction. Besides, the transfer of the workman from
Govindpur Colliery beyond 15 kms. And providing him no
House Accommodation even on several requests are
against the principle of natural justice.
4.
Whereas with specific denials the case of the O.P./
Management is that the workman employed as D.C.L. at
Bhowra (N), U.G. Mines of BCCL. He was issued the
chargesheet dt.21.6.1996 for conduct of unauthorized
absence from 14.10.1992 under clauses 26.1.1 and 26.1.10
6220
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
of the Certified Standing Order of the Company. On finding
his reply unsatisfactory, the enquiry was conducted by
the Enquiry Officer on the charges against him. The
workman participated in the enquiry, and was given full
opportunity for his defence. It was fairly held in accordance
with principle of natural justice. The Enquiry Office found
the charges fully proved against the workman, so he was
furnished with the enquiry report. He was dismissed from
the services as per the letter dt.25/26.10.1996 with the
approval of the competent authority. The workman was a
habitual absentee as also his last three year’s attendances
146, 44 and 137 days in the years 1993 to 1995 respectively
were extremely poor, so the dismissal order of the
Management towards the workman is fully justified.
Accordingly as a token of punishment, the workman
was converted as “BADLI LOADER” as a minor
punishment in place of dismissing from the services, as
per the letter No.324 dt.27.3.1993. In the year 1994, he was
also suspended from 28.2.1994 to 10.03.1994 as per letter
No.59 dt.10.03.94 as a token of punishment for unauthorized
absence from duty, for which he had begged his apology.
Likewise, he was also suspended from 26.4.1995 to 8.5.1995
for his unauthorized absence as per the letter No.97
dt.8.5.1995.In spite of the lenient views taken by the O.P./
Management, the workman did not himself improve, so
the Management finally dismissed him from the services
of the Company as per the letter No.1432 dt.26.10.1996.It
has been prayed for the opportunity to prove the enquiry
on merits, in case the enquiry found unfair and improper
at the preliminary issue.
FINDING WITH REASONS
5.
In the instant reference, at the preliminary issue, the
Tribunal as per the Order No. 18 dt. 21.10.2005 has declared
the domestic enquiry as fair, proper and according to the
principle of natural justice. It result, it came up for hearing
the final argument of both the parties on merits.
Mr. S. N. Goswami, Ld. Advocate for the workman
as per his written argument as well submits that the
workman Hiroo Turi was undoubtedly a permanent
employee as D.C. Loader of Bhowra North Colliery of M/
s. BCCL; but due to the illness of his jaundice, he could
not attend his duty from16.3.1996 to 28.09.1996 during
which he had been under treatment; though the workman
had submitted his explanation to the chargesheet on 28th
Sept. 1996 (Ext. M.2/1) that due to suffering from jaundice
beyond the control of the circumstances he could not
report his duty; moreover he used to attend his duty from
his village 25 kms. away, as he was not given any quarter
for accommodation. Further it is submitted on behalf of
the workman despite his satisfactory reply, the
Management got the departmental enquiry conducted by
the Enquiry Officer hastily within two days; therefter he
was dismissed as per the letter dt.25./26.10.1996 (Ext.M.7)
on the basis of the Enquiry Report dt.15.10.1996 (Ext.M.6);
though the workman had also filed an appeal but in vain;
his dismissal from the service for merely absentism was
quite illegal and harsh for him; moreover, his justified
absence does not cause any loss of his lien in employment,
as such the action of the Management in dismissing the
workman is totally unjustified.
In the instant case neither any authorized Lawyer /
Representative appeared on behalf of the O.P./
Management for argument on merits.
On perusal and consideration of the materials
available on the case records, I find that the workman was
already put in ‘Badli Roll’ in view of his regular absentism
from his duty earlier. In the regular case, the workman
appears to have justified his absence from his duty due to
illness of jaundice which was beyond his control. Under
these circumstances, the dismissal of the workman appears
to be not only harsh but also disproportionate to nature
of his absentism.
Under these circumstances, it is hereby awarded
that the action of the Management of Bhowra (North)
Colliery of M/s. BCCL in dismissing the workman Hiroo
Turi from the services of the Company w.e.f.26.10.1996 is
injustified.It is liable to be set aside. So the workman is
entitled to his reinstatement in his service but without
back wages.
The O.P./Management is directed to implement the
Award within one month from the date of receipt of its
copy of the award following its publication in the Gazette
of India.
KISHORI RAM, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 1 flrEcj] 2014
dk-vk- 2450-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947
dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj lh-lh-,y- ds
izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp] vuqcaèk
esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k@Je
U;k;ky; ua- 2] èkuckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 132@2001) dks
izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 1@9@2014 dks izkIr gqvk
Fkk A
¹la- ,y&20012@199@1999&vkbZvkj (lh&I)º
,e- osQ- ¯lg] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh
New Delhi, the 1st September, 2014
S.O. 2450.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 132/
2001) of the Cent. Govt. Indus. Tribunal-cum-Labour Court
No. 2, Dhanbad as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial
Dispute between the management of M/s. CCL and their
workmen, received by the Central Government on 1/9/2014.
[No. L-20012/199/1999-IR (C-I)]
M. K. SINGH, Section Officer
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6221
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL (NO. 2), AT DHANBAD
PRESENT : Shri Kishori Ram, Presiding Officer
In the matter of an Industrial Dispute under Section
10(1)(d) of the I.D. Act,1947
REFERENCE NO. 132 OF 2001
PARTIES : The Area Secretary,
B.C.W.Bihar Colliery Kamgar Union,
PO : Kathara, Dist;Bokaro
Project Officer,
Swang Washery, of M/s. CCL,
PO : Swang, Distt; Bokaro
Order No. L-20012/199/99 C-I dt.8.5.2001
APPEARANCES :
On behalf of the workman/Union : Mr. D. Mukherjee,
Ld. Advocate
On behalf of the Management
: Mr. D.K. Verma,
Ld. Advocate
State : Jharkhand
Industry : Coal
Dated, Dhanbad, the 31stJuly, 2014.
AWARD
The Government of India, Ministry of Labour, in
exercise of the powers conferred on them under
Sec.10(1)(d) of the I.D. Act.,1947 has referred the following
dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication vide their Order
No. L-20012/199/99C-I dt.8.5.2001
SCHEDULE
“Whether the demand of the Bihar Colliery Kamgar
Union from the Management of Swang Washery of
M/s. C.C.L. for treating Shri Mithalesh Prasad and
18 others as per the list as regular workmen and for
payment of wage as per N.C.W.A. is legal and
justified? If so, what relief the concerned workmen
are entitled to, and from which date. ?”
On receipt of the Order No. L-20012/199/99C-I
dt.8.5.2001 of the above mentioned reference from the
Government of India, Ministry of Labour & Employment,
New Delhi for adjudication of the dispute, the Reference
Case No. 132/2001 of was registered on 30.05.2001 and
accordingly an order to that effect was passed to issue
notices through the Registered Posts to the parties
concerned, directing them to appear in the Court on the
date fixed, and to file their written statements along with
the relevant documents. In pursuance of the said order,
notices by the Registered Posts were sent to the parties
concerned.
Both the parties made their appearances and filed
their pleadings and photocopies of their documents. The
Union and the O.P./Management contested the case,
respectively.
2.
The case of workmen Mithalesh Prasad and 18
others as per the list as sponsored by the Bihar Colliery
Kamgar Union,Jarandih is that they have been performing
the job of repair,changing cleaning of track, maintenance
of plant cleaning which are of permanent nature and
prohibited category in the Railway Yard of the Swang
Colliery since 1990, directly under the control and
supervision of the Management, by putting in more then
240 days attendance in each calendar year. The
Management supplied all the implements for execution of
the job. Since they have been producing goods by their
service for the benefit of the Management, they are the
employees of the Management for all practical purposes
at the payment of wages, much below the rate of NCWA
through different intermediaries, which is a legal
camouflage, as per all the papers arrangement to conceal
the real fact in order to exploit the poor workmen. They
several times represented to the Management for
regularization and payment of wage as per NCWA, but of
no effect. The Union raised the Industrial Dispute before
the A.L.C.(C),Hazaribagh,for it, but its failure due to the
adamant attitude of the Managment. The Government had
illegally rejected the reference,but at its challenge by the
Union, the Government as per the Order dt.27.3.2001 of
the Hon’ble Patna High Court, Ranchi Bench, in the CWJC
No.2145/99(R) referred the dispute for an adjudication.
The action of the Management in not paying the wages as
per the NCWA was illegal, discriminatory, anti labour and
vindictive. Thus the demand of the Union for treating the
workmen as regular workmen and for payment of wages as
per the NCWA is legal and justified.
The Union in its rejoinder has specifically denied all
the allegations of the O.P./Management.
3.
Whereas challenging the maintainability of the
reference, the contra pleaded case of the O.P./Management
with categorical denials is that the persons were never
employed by the Management or by any contractor in the
maintenance job of the Railway track or on Plant cleaning
jobs. They never worked in any capacity under the
management .They are jobseekers and the Union has
enrolled their names to provide them employment through
litigation, for which it has made out a false and fabricated
case .There is no Employer-Employee relationship between
the Management and these persons.
The O.P./Management in their rejoinder has
categorically denied all the allegations of the Union/
persons concerned as baseless and false, alleging that
Sri Mithalesh Prasad and 18 others never worked on any
job of permanent and prohibited categories under the
direct control and supervision of the Management, so no
question arises over the alleged completion of 240 days
attendance in each calendar year nor over the alleged
6222
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
camouflage of their working through contractors. So the
demand of the Union is neither legal nor justified.
4.
In this reference, WWI Sanjay Aggrawal, WW2
Suresh Ravidas, (under Sl.No. 6 & 15 as enlisted
respectively) both of the alleged workmen on behalf of
the Union concerned, and MWI Chandra Kant Tiwary,the
Sr.Manager (Estb & Mech.) at Swang Washery for the
O.P./Management have been examined respectively.
Mr. D.Mukherjee,the Learned Advocate as the
Secretary of the Union concerned as per his written
argument as well has to submit that the workmen have
continuously worked in the Railway Track maintenance
and cleaning of the Management from 1990 to 2002 until
their stopping to work. But the evidence of both WWI
Sanjay Aggrawal and WW2 Suresh Ravidas about their
continuous working up to 2002, the year of stopping from
working appears to be inadmissible as unpleaded.
According to Mr. Mukherjee, for non production of the
document called for as per the petition dt.7.11.2003 but
WW2 stated it to be dated 17.11.2003, adverse inference
should be drawn against the Management as held by the
Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of H.D. Singh Vs. Reserve
Bank of India reported in AIR 1986(SC)132. But the petition
dt.7.11.2003 for calling for documents for the period of
1990 till date from Management appears to be a mere
formality, as no relevant documents with the petition rather
with the photocopies of Payment Register from 1995-97
filed. Whereas the production of photocopies of the
alleged payments (Ext.1 series- Photocopies of Payment
Register) for the years 1995-1997 under alleged signature
of Labour Officer V.S.Prasad) in lack of such basic pleading
also appear to be inadmissible as unpleaded, as also for
the reason that none of the documents is evidently duly
authenticated one of any Contractor or of the Management
of the Swang Washery.The evidence of WW2 in para 18
that he did not know any name of the intermediaries
through whom their wages were paid. The evident
admissions of both workmen witnesses (WW1 & 2) that
none of them had got any gate pass or Identity Card for
entry into the Coal Washery nor they have any proof of it
or any pay slip or any paper to show any Authority’s
direction for their work, nor any copy of their
representation to the Union for sponsorship of it, to
establish no employer-employee relationship between
both the parties at any time. The positive evidence of the
MWI Chandrakant Tiwary, the Asstt.Engineer at the
Swang Washery since 1995 is that he did not know of any
worker, as they never kept any workman as a regular worker
for the maintenance of the Railway Track of the
Washery.To him, the Personnel Department keeps the
record of the Contractors Dilip Jaina,Nirvoy Pandey,Anup
Kumar Ravinder Vikash Parsad and Suraj for maintenance
of the Railway Line, but he can not tell their tenure for it.
5.
On the other hand, Mr.D.K.Verma, Learned Counsel
for the O.P./Management contended that admittedly the
workmen are allegedly contractor’s labourer, out of them
none of them has any proof of his working at the said
colliery, so they are not entitled to any regularization or
any relief.
6.
Besides, so far as the alleged attendances of the
workmen for the years 1995 to 1997 as per the photos of
Attendance register (Ext.W.1 series) is concerned, the
workmen have no proof of their continuous working for
240 days during a period of twelve calendar months
preceding the date with the instance reference - the
4th June,1999 - as per the provision under Sec. 25 B (2)(a)(ii)
of the Industrial Dispute Act,1947. The workmen have
utterly failed to discharge the onus of proof at the points
of employer-employee relationship as well as of their
requisite continuous working for the said specified period
at the relevant time. So the plea of Mr. Mukherjee based
on 2011 LLR 1079(SC), Bhilwara Dugh Utpadak Ltd. Vs.
Vinod Kumar at their point is untenable.
7.
In the backdrop of aforesaid findings, none of the
pleas of Mr.Mukherjee, the Learned Advocate cum Union
Representative based on the facts (i) Presumption of the
evidence of the workmen witnesses in lack of any challenge
(AIR 1940(Pat) 683, Karnidan Sarda Vs. Sailaja Kanta Mitra,
1977 Cr. L.J.410, Bal Krishan Vs. State of Delhi and on the
point of successful discharge of the onus of proof as per
the Ext.W.1 series, 2002 LLR449, M/s. Indian Farmer
Fertilizer Co-operative Ltd. vs. Industrial Tribunal No.1,
Allah, and 2008 AIR SCW 3996, G.M., ONGC Shilcher Vs.
ONGC Contractual Workers Union) is applicable to the
instant unproved case.
Under these circumstances, it is, in the terms of the
Reference, hereby awarded that the demand of the Bihar
Colliery Kamgar Union from the Management of the C.C.L.,
Swang Washery for treating Sri Mithalesh Prasad and 18
others workers as per the list as regularized workers of the
Management, and for giving salary and the benefits as
per NCWA is entirely baseless and unjustified.Hence, the
aforesaid alleged workers are not entitled to any relief
from any time.
KISHORI RAM, Presiding Officer
Annexure
List of the workmen (Ministry’s Order No. L-20012/199/
99(C-I) dt.8.5.2001)
Sl. No.
Name of the workman
1.
Umesh Kumar Nishad
2.
Tilak Mahato
3.
Rameshwar
4.
Raghunath Saw
5.
Dharmnath Prajapati
6.
Sanjay Agarwal
7.
Narayan Prasad
8.
Bharat Soren
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6223
9.
Dhanether Prasad
10.
Mithalesh Prasad
11.
Dearnand Prasad
12.
Lal Mohan Prasad
13.
Bigon Prajapati
14.
Kiran Prajapati
15.
Suresh Ravidas
16.
Sarro Devi
17.
Bhamani Devi
18.
Surjmani
19.
Nandlal Gope
ubZ fnYyh] 1 flrEcj] 2014
dk-vk- 2451-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947
dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj ch-lh-lh-,y-
ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp]
vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd
vfèkdj.k@Je U;k;ky; ua- 2] èkuckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k
73@2000) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 1@9@2014
dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&20012@12@2000&vkbZvkj (lh&I)º
,e- osQ- ¯lg] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh
New Delhi, the 1st September, 2014
S.O. 2451.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 73/2000)
of the Cent. Govt. Indus. Tribunal-cum-Labour Court No
2, Dhanbad as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial
Dispute between the management of M/s. BCCL and their
workmen, received by the Central Government on 1/9/2014.
[No. L-20012/12/2000-IR (C-I)]
M. K. SINGH, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL (NO. 2), AT DHANBAD
PRESENT : Shri Kishori Ram, Presiding Officer.
In the matter of an Industrial Dispute under Section
10(1)(d) of the I.D.Act.,1947.
REFERENCE NO 73 OF 2000
PARTIES : Jt. Gen. Secretary,
Janta Sharmik Sangh,
Ena, Islampur, PO:Baghatdih,
Via Jharia, Dhanbad
Vs.
The Gen.Manager,
Kustore Area of M/s BCCL,
PO : Kustore, Dhanbad
Ministry’s Order No L-20012/12/2000(C-I) dt.24.07.2000
APPEARANCES :
On behalf of the workman/Union : None
On behalf of the Management
: None
State : Jharkhand
Industry : Coal
Dated, Dhanbad, the 30th July, 2014
AWARD
The Government of India, Ministry of Labour, in
exercise of the powers conferred on them under
Sec.10(1)(d) of the I.D. Act.,1947 has referred the following
dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication vide their Order
No. L-20012/12/2000(C-I) dt.24.07.2000.
SCHEDULE
“Whether the action of the Management of
Borragrah Colliery of Kustore Area of M/s BCCL for
dismissal from service of Kartik Yadav, Ex. M. Loader
based on impersonation is legal and justified in the
eye of Law ? If not, what relief the workman is entitled
to?”
On receipt of the Order No. L-20012/12/2000(C-I) dt.
24.07.2000.of the above mentioned reference from the
Government of India, Ministry of Labour & Employment,
New Delhi for adjudication of the dispute, the Reference
Case No. 73-2000 of was registered on 14.08.2000 and
accordingly an order to that effect was passed to issue
notices through the Registered Posts to the parties
concerned, directing them to appear in the Court on the
date fixed, and to file their written statements along with
the relevant documents. In pursuance of the said order,
notices by the Registered Posts were sent to the parties
concerned.
Both the parties made their appearances and filed
their pleadings and photocopies of their documents. The
Union and the O.P./Management contested the case,
respectively, but none appeared for final argument.
2.
The case of sponsoring Janta Shramik Sangh for
workman Kartik Yadav is that he had been continuously
working as M/L at Borrahgarh Colliery under Kustore Area
of M/s BCCL since his employment in 1973. He was a
regular worker sincerely performing his job for the last
18 years. But the employer charged him for impersonation
as per the Standing Order applicable to the Colliery
employees. The charges were mechanically enforced by
hastily taking the action against him without giving any
proper opportunity .In course of the enquiry being
conducted by the Enquiry Officer, the charge was read
over, but without disclosing any such documents to him.
The Advice or order based on the report of Management
Witness No. 2 unnecessarily related to workman before
the Enquiry Officer. But the Enquiry Officer did not call up
the complainant in the enquiry in that regard. Any
publication in any Local News Paper is baseless to implicate
6224
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
the innocent person, depriving him of livelihood. The
method was also adopted to threaten the workman to
deprive of his opportunity to get jobs. Likewise any report
of the Enquiry Officer based on such unfounded
information is nothing but a simple victimization. The poor
worker is a victim of such improper proposal of action
which is unacceptable in law and facts as well. Besides,
the workman was not provided any paper by the Enquiry
Officer despite his repeated requests, oral and written. So
the workman claimed for his reinstatement in his job with
full back wages for his idle period is justified.
3.
The Union Representative in his rejoinder for the
workman has specifically denied all the allegations of the
O.P./Management, and stated that the discharge of duty
by the Enquiry Officer was not impartial. The Enquiry
Officer had no facts available to declare him guilty. The
Sanction of the Competent Authority was without
application of mind. There was no fraud committed by the
workman, as he was the real Kartik Yadav; he was appointed
in regular manner under practice in vague. The action of
the management towards the workman was due to the
rival union and the management jointly to implicate him in
the managed case to put him out of his employment.
4.
Whereas, catgorically denying the allegations of the
Union/workman, the case of the O.P./Management in
challenge to the maintainability of the reference is that the
workman was working as a Miner/Loader at Borrahgarh
Colliery of M/s BCCL. He was chargesheeted by the
Competent Authority as per the letter dt. 26.12.1990 for
misconduct of impersonating real Kartik Yadav son of Sri
Debu Yadav for getting an employment under clause
26.1.11 and 26.1.12 of the Certified Standing Orders of the
Company. The reply of the workman was found
unsatisfactory, so the Competent Authority was per the
letter dt. 9.7.1993 appointed Sri C.N. Singh, the Personnel
Manager as the Enquiry Officer, to conduct the domestic
enquiry into the matter. The workman fully participated
along with his co-worker in the enquiry. The Enquiry Officer
found the charges fully established against the workman
beyond doubt. So at the sanction of the Competent
Authority, the workman was dismissed from his service as
per the letter dt.10.11.1993.The F.I.R. was lodged with the
Officer-In-Charge, Borrahgarh T.O.P., P.S. Jharia on
7.1.1991.The workman never complained of anything
against the enquiry held by the Enquiry Officer during its
proceeding. The action of the Management for dismissal
of the workman for said fraudulent misconduct is legal
and justified. The Joint General Secretary of the said Sangh
as per letter dt.08.03.1999 raised the Industrial Dispute
before the A.L.C.(C), Dhanbad, after many years. So the
reference is not maintainable.
5.
The O.P./Management in their rejoinder categorically
denying all the allegations of the Union/workman
concerned, has further pleaded that the enquiry was
conducted in accordance with the Principles of Natural
Justice. Any punishment short of dismissal would have
encouraged other to get jobs dubiously in the Company.
The O.P./Management has also sought the permission for
proof the charge, in case the enquiry found unfair at
preliminary issue.
FINDING WITH REASONS
6.
In this reference, at the preliminary issue over the
enquiry, the Tribunal as per the Order No.18 dt. 6.12.2005
had already held the domestic enquiry as fair, proper and
in accordance with the principles of natural justice. Hence,
it came up lately for hearing the final argument of both the
parties on merits.
The case has been all along pending for arguments
on merits. Despite several times notices have been issued
to both the parties, but none appered, so it was finally
reserved for final order.
On perusal of the materials as made available on
behalf of the O.P./Management for final consideration on
merits, I find that the dismissal of alleged workman Kartik
Yadav who had been working as Loader impersonating
actual M/Loder Kartik Yadav S/o Debu Yadav at Burrogarh
Colliery, Bhalgora Area- for his misconducts under clauses
26.1.11 and 26.1.12, i.e. of the Certified Standing Orders of
the Company as per the dismissal letter dt. 9/10.9.1993
(Ext. M.7) was not only quite proper but also just and
proportionate to the grave nature of the said misconducts.
The imposter whose real name was Lali Saw S/o Sarda
Saw of Vill Kusumhara P.S. Visenikalan Distt: Rohtas (Bihar)
must not be free from his criminal liability for his wilful
misconducts of criminal offences concerned.
Hence, it is, in the terms of the reference, hereby
responded and awarded that the action of the Management
of Borrahgarh Colliery, Kustore Area of M/s BCCL in
dismissing the alleged employee Kartik Yadav (Imposter),
Ex.M/Loader from the service on the ground of
impersonation of real employee Kartik Yadav is quite legally
right, proper and justified. The alleged worker is not at all
entitled to any relief.
KISHORI RAM, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 1 flrEcj] 2014
dk-vk- 2452-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947
dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj ch-lh-lh-,y-
ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp
vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd
vfèkdj.k@Je U;k;ky; ua- 2] èkuckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k
80@2012) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 1@9@2014
dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&20012@151@2011&vkbZvkj (lh,e&I)º
,e- osQ- ¯lg] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6225
New Delhi, the 1st September, 2014
S.O. 2452.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 80/2012)
of the Cent. Govt. Indus. Tribunal-cum-Labour Court No
2, Dhanbad as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial
Dispute between the management of M/s. BCCL and their
workmen, received by the Central Government on 1/9/2014.
[No. L-20012/151/2011-IR (CM-I)]
M. K. SINGH, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL (NO. 2) AT DHANBAD
PRESENT : Shri Kishori Ram, Presiding Officer
In the matter of an Industrial Dispute under Section
10(1)(d) of the I.D. Act,1947.
REFERENCE NO. 80 OF 2012
PARTIES : The Vice President,
Rastriya Colliery Mazdoor Sangh,
Rajendra Path, Dhanbad,
Vs.
The General Manager
Kusunda Area of M/s BCCL,
PO : Kusunda, Dhanbad.
Ministry’s Order No. L-20012/151/2011-IR
(CM-I) dt.12.09.2012.
APPEARANCES :
On behalf of the workman/Union : None
On behalf of the Management
: Mr. S. N. Ghosh,
Ld. Advocate
State : Jharkhand
Industry : Coal
Dated, Dhanbad, the 07th July, 2014
AWARD
The Government of India, Ministry of Labour, in
exercise of the powers conferred on them under
Sec.10(1)(d) of the I.D. Act,1947 has referred the following
dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication vide their Order
No. L-20012/151/2011-IR (CM-I) dt.12.09.2012.
SCHEDULE
“Whether the action of the Management of Khas
Kusunda Colliery of M/s. BCCL in not paying
monetary compensation to Smt.Chinta Devi,
dependant wife of Late Bindeshwari Singh under
the provisions of NCWA is legal and justified? To
what relief Smt.Chinta Devi, dependant wife of Late
Bindehwari Singh is entitled?”
2.
Neither Union Representative for the Rastriya
Colliery Mazdoor Sangh nor petitioner Smt.Chinta Devi,
dependant wife of Late Bindeshwari Singh appeared nor
any written statement with any document since long
pending has been filed on her behalf. Mr. S.N. Ghosh, the
Ld. Advocate for the O.P./Management Kusunda Area is
present.
Perused the case record, I find that despite three
Regd. Notices dt. 20.12.2012, 08.06.13 and 28.03.2014 have
been issued to the Vice President of the Union concerned
on his address noted in the Reference itself but neither
the Union Representative nor the Petitioner responded to
it. The reference case has been all along pending since
01.10.2013 for filing written statement with documents.
The Union Representative and the petitioner by their
conducts appear to be unwilling or reluctant to proceed
with the case. In such circumstances, no Industrial Dispute
exists as it stands. Since the case is closed and an order of
‘No Industrial Dispute’ existent is passed.
KISHORI RAM, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 8 flrEcj] 2014
dk-vk- 2453-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947
dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj bZ-lh-,y- ds
izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp vuqcaèk esa
fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k@Je
U;k;ky; ua- 1] èkuckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 17@2011) dks
izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 8@9@2014 dks izkIr gqvk
FkkA
¹la- ,y&20012@42@2010&vkbZvkj (lh,e&I)º
,e- osQ- ¯lg] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh
New Delhi, the 8th September, 2014
S.O. 2453.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 17/2011)
of the Cent. Govt. Indus. Tribunal-cum-Labour Court No
1, Dhanbad as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial
Dispute between the management of M/s. ECL and their
workmen, received by the Central Government on 8/9/2014.
[No. L-20012/42/2010-IR (CM-I)]
M. K. SINGH, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL
TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT NO. I,
DHANBAD
In the matter of reference U/S 10 (1) (d) (2A) of
I.D. Act, 1947
Ref. No. 17 of 2011
Employer in relation to the management
of Mugma Area, M/s ECI
AND
Their workmen
6226
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
Present : Sri Ranjan Kumar Saran, Presiding Officer
Appearances :
For the Employers
: Sri D.K.Verma, Advocate
For the workman
: None
State : Jharkhand
Industry : Coal
Dated : 11/8/2014
AWARD
By Order No. L-20012/42/2010-IR (C-I), dated
14/03/2011, the Central Government in the Ministry of
Labour has, in exercise of the powers conferred by clause
(d) of sub-section (1) and sub –section (2A) of Section 10
of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, referred the following
disputes for adjudication to this Tribunal:
SCHEDULE
“Whether the action of the management of
Lakhimata Colliery of M/s. ECL in not regularizing
Smt. Sonammuni Modian as CC Maker is fair and
justified? To what relief the concerned workman is
entitled to?”
2.
After receipt of the reference the parties are noticed,
Though they took steps for certain dates, subsequently
did not appears nor take any interest in the case. It is
presumed that the disputes between parties have been
resolved in the meantime, Hence No Dispute Award is
passed.
R. K. SARAN, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 8 flrEcj] 2014
dk-vk- 2454-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947
dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj ch-lh-lh-,y-
ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp
vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd
vfèkdj.k@Je U;k;ky; ua- 1] èkuckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k
34@2010) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 8@9@2014
dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&20012@05@2010&vkbZvkj (lh,e&I)º
,e- osQ- ¯lg] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh
New Delhi, the 8th September, 2014
S.O. 2454.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 34/2010)
of the Cent. Govt. Indus. Tribunal-cum-Labour Court No
1, Dhanbad as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial
Dispute between the management of M/s. BCCL and their
workmen, received by the Central Government on 8/9/2014.
[No. L-20012/05/2010-IR (CM-I)]
M. K. SINGH, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL
TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT NO. I,
DHANBAD
In the matter of reference U/S 10 (1) (d) (2A) of I.D.Act,1947
Ref. No. 34 of 2010 .
Employer in relation to the management of
Kusunda Area, M/s. BCCL
AND
Their workmen
Present : Sri Ranjan Kumar Saran, Presiding Officer
Appearances :
For the Employers
: Sri U.N.Lall, Advocate
For the Workman
: Sri M. Prasad, Advocate
State : Jharkhand
Industry : Coal
Dated 11/8 /2014
AWARD
By Order No.L-20012/05/2010-IR (CM-I), dated
18/05/2010, the Central Government in the Ministry of
Labour has, in exercise of the powers conferred by clause
(d) of sub-section (1) and sub-section (2A) of Section 10
of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, referred the following
disputes for adjudication to this Tribunal:
SCHEDULE
“Whether the action of the management of Kusunda
Colliery of M/s. BCCL in not regularizing Sri Krishna
Ram , a Shoval Operator, is legal and justified? What
relief the concerned workman is entitled ?”
2.
After receipt of the reference the parties are noticed,
though they took steps for certain dates. But after that the
Sponsoring Union is not taking any interest in the case.
Ld. counsel for the workman is also submits that the
workman is not taking any interest. It is presumed that the
disputes between parties have been resolved in the
meantime. Hence, No Dispute Award is passed.
R. K. SARAN, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 8 flrEcj] 2014
dk-vk- 2455-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947
dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj bZ-lh-,y- ds
izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp vuqcaèk esa
fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k@Je
U;k;ky; ua- 1] èkuckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 14@2011) dks
izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 8@9@2014 dks izkIr gqvk
FkkA
¹la- ,y&20012@66@2010&vkbZvkj (lh,e&I)º
,e- osQ- ¯lg] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6227
New Delhi, the 8th September, 2014
S.O. 2455.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 14/2011)
of the Cent. Govt. Indus. Tribunal-cum-Labour Court No.
1, Dhanbad as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial
Dispute between the management of M/s. ECL and their
workmen, received by the Central Government on 8/9/2014.
[No. L-20012/66/2010-IR (CM-I)]
M. K. SINGH, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL
TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT NO. I,
DHANBAD
In the matter of reference U/s 10 (1) (d) (2A) of
I.D. Act 1947
Ref. No. 14 of 2011
Employer in relation to the management of
Mugma Area, M/s. ECL
AND
Their workmen
Present : Sri Ranjan Kumar Saran, Presiding Officer
Appearances :
For the Employers
: Sri D.K. Verma, Advocate
For the workman
: None
State : Jharkhand
Industry : Coal
Dated : 11/8/2014
AWARD
By Order No. L-20012/66/2010-IR (CM-I), dated
16/03/2011, the Central Government in the Ministry of
Labour has, in exercise of the powers conferred by clause
(d) of sub-section (1) and sub –section (2A) of Section 10
of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, referred the following
disputes for adjudication to this Tribunal:
SCHEDULE
“Whether the action of the management of Rajapur
OCP of M/s. ECL in not regularizing /converting
S/Shri Nayan Manjhi, Taru Bouri, Meghnath Bouri,
Sri Dipak Bouri and Banshi Bouri from Piece Rate to
Time rate is fair and justified? To what relief the
concerned workmen are entitled to ?”
2.
After receipt of the reference the parties are noticed,
Though they took steps for certain dates, subsequently
did not appears nor take any interest in the case. It is
presumed that the disputes between parties have been
resolved in the meantime, Hence No Dispute Award is
passed.
R. K. SARAN, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 8 flrEcj] 2014
dk-vk- 2456-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947
dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj ch-lh-lh-,y-
ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp
vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd
vfèkdj.k@Je U;k;ky; ua- 1] èkuckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k
253@2000) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 8@9@2014
dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&20012@70@2000&vkbZvkj (lh&I)º
,e- osQ- ¯lg] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh
New Delhi, the 8th September, 2014
S.O. 2456.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 253/
2000) of the Cent. Govt. Indus. Tribunal-cum-Labour Court
No. 1, Dhanbad as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial
Dispute between the management of M/s. BCCL and their
workmen, received by the Central Government on 8/9/2014.
[No. L-20012/70/2000-IR (C-I)]
M. K. SINGH, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL
-CUM- LABOUR COURT NO. I, DHANBAD
In the matter of reference U/s 10 (1) (d) (2A) of
I.D. Act, 1947
Ref. No. 253 of 2000
Employer in relation to the management
of Koyla Bhawan, M/s. BCCL
AND
Their workmen
Present : Shri Ranjan Kumar Saran, Presiding Officer
Appearances :
For the Employers
: Sri D.K.Verma, Advocate
For the workman
: None
For the Impleaded Party : None
State : Jharkhand
Industry : Coal
Dated- 12/8/2014
AWARD
By Order No.L-20012/70/2000-IR (C-I), dated.07/09/
2000, the Central Government in the Ministry of Labour
has, in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of
sub-section (1) and sub –section (2A) of Section 10 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, referred the following
disputes for adjudication to this Tribunal:
6228
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
SCHEDULE
“Whether the action of the management of BCCL
Koyla Bhawan in refusing employment to the
dependant son of the deceased workman namly Sri
Ram Swarup Ram is justified? If not, to what relief
the dependant son of the deceased workman is
entitled ?”
2.
After receipt of the reference the parties are noticed,
Though they took steps for certain dates, subsequently
did not appears nor take any interest in the case. It is
presumed that the disputes between parties have been
resolved in the meantime, Hence No Dispute Award is
passed.
R. K. SARAN, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 8 flrEcj] 2014
dk-vk- 2457-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947
dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj ch-lh-lh-,y-
ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp
vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd
vfèkdj.k@Je U;k;ky; ua- 1] èkuckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k
39@2012) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 8@9@2014
dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&20012@98@2007&vkbZvkj (lh,e&I)º
,e- osQ- ¯lg] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh
New Delhi, the 8th September, 2014
S.O. 2457.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 39/2012)
of the Cent. Govt. Indus. Tribunal-cum-Labour Court No.
1, Dhanbad as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial
Dispute between the management of M/s. BCCL and their
workmen, received by the Central Government on 8/9/2014.
[No. L-20012/98/2007-IR (CM-I)]
M. K. SINGH, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL
TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT NO. I,
DHANBAD
In the matter of reference U/s 10 (1) (d) (2A) of
I.D. Act, 1947
Ref. No. 39 of 2012
Employer in relation to the management of
Sijua Area, M/s. BCCL
AND
Their workmen
Present : Sri Ranjan Kumar Saran, Presiding Officer
Appearances :
For the Employers
: Sri D.K. Verma, Advocate
For the workman
: None
State : Jharkhand
Industry : Coal
Dated-20/8/2014
AWARD
By Order No.L-20012/98/2007-IR (CM-I), dated
17/08/2007, the Central Government in the Ministry of
Labour has, in exercise of the powers conferred by clause
(d) of sub-section (1) and sub –section (2A) of Section 10
of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, referred the following
disputes for adjudication to this Tribunal:
SCHEDULE
“Whether the action of the management of Sendra
Bansjora Colliery of M/s. BCCL in denying
regularization as cap Lamp Assistant to Shri Arun
Rawani General mazdoor (U.G) is justified and legal?
If not, to what relief is the concerned workman
entitled and from which date ?”
2.
After receipt of the reference the parties are noticed,
Though they took steps for certain dates, subsequently
did not appears nor take any interest in the case. It is
presumed that the disputes between parties have been
resolved in the meantime, Hence No Dispute Award is
passed.
R. K. SARAN, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 8 flrEcj] 2014
dk-vk- 2458-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947
dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj ch-lh-lh-,y-
ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp
vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd
vfèkdj.k@Je U;k;ky; ua- 1] èkuckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k
21@2009) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 8@9@2014
dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&20012@95@2008&vkbZvkj (lh,e&I)º
,e- osQ- ¯lg] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh
New Delhi, the 8th September, 2014
S.O. 2458.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 21/2009)
of the Cent. Govt. Indus. Tribunal-cum-Labour Court No.
1, Dhanbad as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial
Dispute between the management of M/s. BCCL and their
workmen, received by the Central Government on 8/9/2014.
[No. L-20012/95/2008-IR (CM-I)]
M. K. SINGH, Section Officer
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6229
ANNEXURE
CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL
TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURT NO. I,
DHANBAD
In the matter of reference U/S 10 (1) (d) (2A) of I.D.Act.1947
Ref. No. 21 of 2009
Employer in relation to the management of
Nichitpur Colliery M/s. BCCL,
AND
Their workmen.
Present : Sri Ranjan Kumar Saran, Presiding Officer
Appearances :
For the Employers
: Sri D.K. Verma, Advocate
For the workman
: Sri U.N. Lall , Advocate .
State : Jharkhand
Industry : Coal.
Dated 21/8 /2014
AWARD
By Order No.L-20012/95/2008-IR (CM-I), dated
16/02/2009, the Central Government in the Ministry of
Labour has, in exercise of the powers conferred by clause
(d) of sub-section (1) and sub-section (2A) of Section 10
of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, referred the following
disputes for adjudication to this Tribunal:
SCHEDULE
“(i) Whether the action of the management of
Nichitpur Colliery of M/s. BCCL in Superannuating
Smt. Noulash Devi W/Loader w.e.f. 30.06.2005 is
justified and legal?(ii) To What relief is the workman
concerned entitled ?”
2.
After receipt of the reference the parties are noticed,
Though they took steps for certain dates, But after that
the Sponsoring Union is not taking any interest in the
case. Id counsel for the workman is also submits that the
workman is not taking any interest. It is presumed that the
disputes between parties have been resolved in the
meantime, Hence No Dispute Award is passed.
R. K. SARAN, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 8 flrEcj] 2014
dk-vk- 2459-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947
dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj ch-lh-lh-,y-
ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp
vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd
vfèkdj.k@Je U;k;ky; ua- 1] èkuckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k
60@2003) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 8@9@2014
dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&20012@269@2002&vkbZvkj (lh&I)º
,e- osQ- ¯lg] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh
New Delhi, the 8th September, 2014
S.O. 2459.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 60/2003)
of the Cent. Govt. Indus. Tribunal-cum-Labour Court No
1, Dhanbad as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial
Dispute between the management of M/s. BCCL and their
workmen, received by the Central Government on 8/9/2014.
[No. L-20012/269/2002-IR (C-I)]
M. K. SINGH, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO. 1, DHANBAD.
In the matter of reference U/s 10 (1) (d) (2A) of
I.D.Act. 1947
Ref. No. 60 of 2003
Employer in relation to the management of
Sijua Area M/s. BCCL
AND
Their workmen
Present : Sri Ranjan Kumar Saran, Presiding Officer.
Appearances :
For the Employers
: Sri D.K. Verma, Advocate
For the workman
: Sri B.B. Pandey, Advocate
State : Jharkhand
Industry : Coal
Dated 20/8/ 2014
AWARD
By Order No.L-20012/269/2002-IR (C-I), dated.08/
07/2003, the Central Government in the Ministry of Labour
has, in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of
sub-section (1) and sub –section (2A) of Section 10 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, referred the following
disputes for adjudication to this Tribunal:
SCHEDULE
“Whether the demand of RCMS from the
management of BCCL, Sijua Area to consider the
V.R.S. application of Smt. Shanti Pasin and to provide
employment to her son, Sri vivekanand is proper
6230
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
and justified? If so, to what relief is the concerned
workman and her dependent entitled? ’’
2.
This Case is received from the Ministry of Labour &
Employment on 22.07.2003. After receipt of reference ,
both parties are noticed. The Sponsoring Union files their
written statement on 13.05.2010. The management files their
written statement on 22.07.2010. One witness has been
examined on behalf of the management. No witness has
been examined on behalf of the workman but they only
marked document as Ext. W-1 to W-4.
3.
The short point to be decided in this reference is as
per female V.R.S. Scheme. One lady workman applied for
V.R.S. and their male child applied for job in the place of
the lady workman.
4.
The BCCL management did not act on the
application of woman workman as a result of which , the
lady workman retired, and virtually application for job of
her dependent workman refused.
5.
When the dispute arose it is argued by the
management that there is no provision to give employment
to his /her dependent of retired employee under V.R.S.
Scheme. But it is submitted by the female workman that as
there case was not considered, his children are out of
employment since more than 10 years and above.
6.
It is also submitted by the workman, that they applied
according to scheme below the age of 55, and their claim
should have been decided promptly.
7.
As per Ext. W-1 the workman filed the petition on
05.10.2000, and in this regard the management also send
the reply on 18.11.2000 directing the applicant to file certain
documents as per list. But the workman or her dependent
did not comply the same.
8.
From the document Ext. W-2 it appears that the
workman was asked to submit application in proper format
alongwith documents enclosed. But the same was not
complied by the workman . Hence the management is not
obliged to provide job to the dependent of the female
workman, since she retired after attending her sixtieth
years of service. Therefore the claim of the workman is
refused.
9.
Considering the facts and circumstance of the case,
I hold that the demand of RCMS from the management of
BCCL, Sijua Area to consider the V.R.S. application of Smt.
Shanti Pasin and to provide employment to her son, Sri
vivekanand is not proper and justified. Hence he not
entitled to get any relief.
This is my award.
R. K. SARAN, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 8 flrEcj] 2014
dk-vk- 2460-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947
dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj nf{k.k iwoZ jsysos
ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp
vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd
vfèkdj.k] tcyiqj ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 46@06) dks izdkf'kr
djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 8@9@2014 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&41012@25@1992&vkbZvkj (ch&I)º
lqefr ldykuh] vuqHkkx vfèdkjh
New Delhi, the 8th September, 2014
S.O. 2460.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 46/06)
of the Cent. Govt. Indus. Tribunal-cum-Labour Court,
Jabalpur as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute
between the management of South Eastern Railway and
their workmen, received by the Central Government on
08/09/2014.
[No. L-41012/25/1992-IR (B-I)]
SUMATI SAKLANI, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,
JABALPUR
NO. CGIT/LC/R/46/06
PRESIDING OFFICER : SHRI R.B. PATLE
Shri Avadhram,
S/o Shri Ramprit, G-Cabin,
Bhilai Charoda BMY,
Bhilai, Distt. Durg
.....Workman
Versus
Divisional Railway Manager,
S.E. Railway,
Bilaspur.
General Manager,
S.E. Railway ,
Garden Reach, Kolkata
.....Management
AWARD
Passed on this 30th day of July 2014
1.
As per letter dated 29-8-2006 by the Government of
India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi, the reference is
received. The reference is made to this Tribunal under
Section -10 of I.D.Act, 1947 as per Notification No.L-41012/
25/1992-IR(B-I). The dispute under reference relates to:
“Whether the action of the management of South
Eastern Railway in terminating the services of Shri
Avadhram orally w.e.f. 13-5-90 is legal and justified?
If not, to what relief he is entitled to?”
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6231
2.
After receiving reference, notices were issued to
the parties. Workman submitted statement of claim at Page
4/1 to 4/6. Case of workman is that he was employed as
Gangman on temporary status vide appointment order
dated 2-3-90. After issue of said appointment order, he
was engaged as Gangman and continued to work as such
in Bilaspur Division of S.E.Railway. That it is surprised
without giving order in writing, his services were orally
terminated w.e.f. 30-5-90. Prior to his termination, no notice
or order was issued to workman. That alongwith him about
150 persons were promoted by Railway Administration.
All these persons represented the matter to Railway
Administration vide letter dated 3-12-90 through their
representative Shri Dilip Kumar. Ist party workman and
many other persons were terminated by various orders
because the workmen had adopted employment in Railway
by producing false documents. It is reiterated that
workman was appointed and joined duty on 2-3-90. He
completed 120 days service. He attained temporary status
provided under Indian Railway Establishment Manual.
The casual labour who attained temporary status is entitled
to rights and privileges under Sl.No. 2511 of Railway
Establishment Manual. Said provision contemplates that
all the provisions of the disciplinary and Appeal Rules are
applicable to such an employee. The services of workman
were terminated on charges of securing employment by
producing false documents. Workman can not be
terminated without following procedure. He further
submits that termination of his service is for alleged
misconduct. Therefore it was necessary to conduct
enquiry. Issuing showcause notice was mandatory.
Termination was not without following principles of natural
justice. The termination is violative of mandatory
provisions and deserves to be quashed and set-aside. Ist
party workman further submits that he is covered as
workman under I.D.Act. The termination without
conducting enquiry, without giving him opportunity
amounts to retrenchment under I.D.Act. Said retrenchment
was without giving any retrenchment compensation and
therefore void. The termination is arbitrary, illegal and liable
to be quashed. Workman further submits that order of
removal from service, denying opportunity for defence is
violative of Article 311 of the constitution. The termination
without giving opportunity of hearing is illegal. The
termination of service without opportunity of hearing is
nullity. The workman reiterates all those contentions and
submits that he may be allowed reinstatement with back
wages.
3.
IInd party filed Written Statement at page 7/1 to 7/3.
All material contentions of workman are denied. IInd party
denies that workman was engaged as gangman on daily
rated casual basis. It is submitted that there was a
condition stipulated in engagement letter dated 14-2-90
that if the working certificate/caste certificate/ service
certificate is found false, at any time during engagement,
the workman be terminated without any notice. Therefore
workman along with other casual gangman whose
certificate was found false were terminated. It is denied
that workman completed 120 days and he obtained
temporary status. It is submitted that in view of condition
mentioned in engagement letter, no notice was required to
be issued to the workman for termination of his service.
Since the act of workman securing Government service as
casual Gangman producing false certificate. Since
termination from service is not arbitrary, IInd party submits
that workman should prove that the service certificate is
bonafide. On all such contentions, IInd party prays for
rejection of claim.
4.
Workman filed rejoinder at Page 8/1 to 8/2 reiterating
its contentions in Statement of claim.
5.
Considering pleadings on record, the points which
arise for my consideration and determination are as under.
My findings are recorded against each of them for the
reasons as below:-
(i)
Whether the action of the manage-
In Negative
ment of South Eastern Railway in
terminating the services of Shri
Avadhram orally w.e.f. 13-5-90 is
legal and justified?
(ii) If not, what relief the workman
As per final
is entitled to?”
order.
REASONS
6.
The workman submits that he had completed 120
days service as casual labour as per Establishment Manual
2511, he has attended temporary status. The establishment
manual 2511 contemplate that all provisions of Disciplinary
and Appeal Rules are applicable to such employees. The
services of workman were terminated without holding any
kind of enquiry is legal. Though time was given to learned
counsel for Ist party to produce Railway Establishment
Manual 2511, it is not produced for perusal. The pleadings
in statement of claim of workman show that he was
appointed vide order dated 2-3-90 and terminated on 30-5-
90. Thus he hardly worked for 2 months 11 days and not
120 days claimed by workman in his affidavit of evidence.
Evidence of workman in para-5 on above point is
inconsistent with pleadings and cannot be relied.
7.
Workman filed affidavit of his evidence. His affidavit
is devoted about raising dispute after filing Writ Petition
No. 1573/97 which was transferred to Chattisgarh High
Court. Workman has stated that he was employed as
gangman on temporary status as per order dated 2-3-90.
He continued to work as such in Bilaspur Division. In
Para-8 workman submits that there was no need to submit
casual card or any other certificate for getting employment
as casual labour. Therefore he could not be terminated on
said ground. That termination of his service is without
6232
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
giving opportunity of hearing is illegal. In his cross-
examination workman says after two months working in
May 1990, he was stopped from working in the department.
He knows that department had given letter if any irregularity
was found in appointment, the appointment shall stand
cancelled. The Writ petition was filed in High Court by
Baburao. He was not party. He claims that temporary status
was granted to him for the days he was working. He denies
that document produced by him was bogus and therefore
his services were terminated. From evidence of workman,
it is clear that he was appointed as casual gangman on
2-3-90. His services were terminated from 13-5-90. Workman
hardly worked for 2 months 11 days.
8.
The evidence of management’s witness Shri
R.Shankaran is on the point that workman was appointed
in Railway as per notification in 1990 as casual gangman.
The condition was stipulated by management in
notification that if at any time it is found that the certificate
are false during their engagement the service will be
terminated automatically without notice. The department
had carried out mass verification of certificates submitted
by candidates and on detailed investigation after
scrutinizing of records it was found that there were about
150 candidates found false appointees based on fake
certificates. Management’s witness further said that the
administration decided to take stern action with heavy
hand not leaving those who are found guilty. However
the relevant files and documents were stolen from the office
of the Investigating officer Shri Bhasker Rao by breaking
the lock and almirah. Management’s witness in his cross-
examination says in 1990, he was posted in Garden Reach
in Calcutta, S.E.Rly. He was giving evidence as per record,
gone through available record. He has seen notification
by which workman was appointed. The notification of
workman was on casual basis. Advertisement of the post
was of casual basis. The advertisement continued clause
that past experience if available would be considered.
Casual workers are issued certificate of their experience of
working in Railway. He claimed ignorance whether any
register is maintained for issuing such certificate. The
witness said Committee was nominated for verifying
genuine of experience certificate. Said Committee was
headed by Bhaskar Rao, APO, Bilaspur. He has not seen
document about constitution of said committee. The office
of Bhaskar Rao was not provided with security. There
was Security Guard at entrance of the gate. The witness
was unable to tell whether the room of the office of Bhaskar
Rao was locked on the day of alleged incident. He admits
that about 140 persons including workmen were terminated
from service as per record. In para-6 of the affidavit it is
stated that documents were taken away breaking lock of
Almirah. He claims ignorance whether report of Committee
was sent to the workman. He also claims ignorance whether
genuine certificate of expenses remained with railway
office.
9.
Document Exhibit M-1 shows list of casual gangman
appointed vide office order dated 14-2-90, 22-2-90 should
be discharged with immediate effect as the certificate
produced have been found false. The letter speaks that
those candidates should not be reengaged. The date of
discharge should be intimated to the office. Their names
are recorded in blank list register. No AEN/PWI should
issue service certificates in favour of these candidates.
Workman in his evidence says that production of
experience certificate was not necessary for appointment
as casual gangman whereas management’s witness says
that experience certificate was necessary. Workman has
not produced appointment order issued by Railway
authorities to him. The evidence of workman is not
corroborated by document. On the other hand,
management has produced document Exhibit M-1. The
details of the documents discussed above clearly shows
that the experience certificate produced by large number
of candidates were found fake on scrutiny. The incident
was also reported to police, FIR was lodged. FIR is not
proved. Management’s witness has stated the material
documents were stolen breaking office of Bhaskar Rao,
Inspecting Officer. Management’s witness is cross-
examined in detail. However there is no suggestion of the
management’s witness that because of theft breaking lock
was not submitted. The evidence is tested on probability.
The evidence of management’s witness is corroborated
by document Exhibit M-1. That large number of candidates
had submitted experience certificate and such certificates
were found fake. The evidence about scrutiny of those
documents is not produced on record. Mr. Bhaskar Rao is
not examined.
10.
Learned counsel for workman submitted written
notes of argument and copies of award passed in R/74/09,
53/91 & 139/93 pointing out the view taken by this Tribunal
in different cases. Award are not binding but consistency
needs to be adopted. In R/74/05, relief to workman Ku.
Vidyavwati, the legality of resignation letter was in
question. Management had failed to prove that resignation
submitted by said workman was legal. From reading of
Para-11 of the award it can be seen that only evidence
shows that workman was not given any time for
reconciliation. She signed on the documents believing that
it pertains regularization of her absence and payment of
salary. Therefore alleged resignation accepted by
management was found not legal. In R/153/91, dispute
related to those documents passing 10th standard, HSc
Examination by workman. From reading of Para-9 of the
award, it can be seen that Principal of Govt. School,
Chhappa has reported that workman was not student of
said school, the documents were bogus. IInd party
produced those documents at Page 12/4, 12/5.
Management’s witness stated that those documents 12/5
were produced by workman alongwith biodata form. There
was no reason for management of IInd party verify
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6233
genuiness from Principal Govt. School, Chhappa. The facts
of the present case are not comparable. Workman has not
produced appointment letter issued to him. To substantiate
his contention that submitting experience certificate was
not necessary for appointment as casual gangman. If
document Exhibit M-1 is considered, it appears that
submission of service card was necessary for appointment
as casual employee. In award in R/139/93, workman had
pleaded that he attained temporary status after completion
of 120 days service. That termination of his service was in
violation of Section 25-F of I.D.Act. In present case,
workman is not alleging violation of Section 25-F of I.D.Act.
Despite of pleadings that he acquired temporary status
on completion of 120 days working as per Railway
Establishment Manual 2511, the rule is not produced. On
perusal, pleading of workman itself shows that he was
appointed on 3-2-90 and orally terminated on 13-5-90. He
worked for 2 months 11 days. Therefore question of
violation of Section 25-F of I.D.Act doesnot arise.
11.
Learned counsel for workman Shri A.K.Shashi
heavily emphasized that services were terminated on
ground that service certificate submitted by workman was
found fake. No enquiry was conducted. The termination
of his service is stigma on workman. Therefore termination
of service of workman is illegal. In support of his argument,
learned counsel relies on ratio held in :
Case of Indu Bhushan Dwivedi and State of
Jharkhand reported in 2010-SCLJ-416. Above cited
case related to appellant joined service as Munsif in
1982, he was promoted as Sub Divisional Judicial
Magistrate in 1996. While he was posted as Sub
Divisional Judicial Magistrate at Chaibasa, a news
item appeared in Dainik Jagran dated 2-7-03
suggesting that the appellant had misbehaved and
manhandled an accused, named, Anup Kumar ad
constable Sheo Pujan Baitha. On the next day i.e. on
3-7-03, the appellant made a representation to
District and Sessions Judge, West Singhbhum at
Chaibasa with the request that an inquiry be got
conducted into the matter. From reading of para-8 of
the judgment it is clear that Enquiry Officer
formulated total 5 points for the same of his
convenience.
The facts of the present case are not comparable
therefore ratio cannot be applied to case at hand.
12.
There is serious dispute between parties whether
for appointment of casual gangman, submission of
experience certificate was necessary, whether it was a
condition for re-appointment. If such certificate is found
false, fake, bogus, the services of casual gangman so
appointed could be automatically terminated. Workman
though appointed on 3-2-90, he has not produced the
appointment letter. He has not explained reasons for non-
production of the appointment letter. On the other hand,
the evidence of management’s witness shows that Bhaskar
Rao was inspecting gangman for experience certificate and
theft of record was committed by breaking lock. The
evidence of witness on above point is not shattered in
cross-examination. Therefore I find no reason to discuss
evidence of management’s witness when record is lost, it
was the record about verification of experience certificate
was lost because of theft. There was condition in
appointment order if experience certificate submitted by
candidate found false, their services would be terminated
automatically without notice it forms the part of service
conditions. Management of IInd party has terminated
services as per conditions in the appointment order. As
workman had worked only for 2 months 11 days, he has
not acquired temporary status, it was not necessary to
hold DE against workman. On the point, learned counsel
for Ist party relies on ratio held in :
Reliance is also placed in case of Bhagwan Singh
Rawat versus State of MP reported in 2003(4)
M.P.J.T.309. the facts of present case are not
comparable as in above cited case allegation against
petitioners was of making demand of illegal
gratification- removal from the post. Their Lordship
held until and unless petitioner is found guilty of
demanding illegal gratification and charge is
established, the petitioner could not be fastened
with penalty of removal without making any enquiry
into charge of demand of illegal gratification.
Case of Nepal singh versus State of UP reported in
AIR -1980-SC-1459. Their Lordship held the order
terminating the services of temporary Govt. servant
and exfacie innocuous in that it doesnot cast any
stigma on the Govt. servant or visits him with penal
consequences must be regarded as effecting a
termination simpliciter but if it is discovered on the
basis of material adduced that although innocent in
its terms the order was passed in fact with a view to
punishing the Government servant, it is a punitive
order which can be passed only after complying
with Article 311(2).
Considering the ratio in above cited case and order
Exhibit M-1, the IInd party had directed candidates
should not be re-engaged in circumstances that their
names are recorded in the blank list register. Further
FIR with police will be lodged under Section 420 of
IPC for cheating and forgery document the candidate
and Sr. Subordinates who had issued false
certificates. His Lordship considering the petitioner
were appointed initially on daily wage basis by order
dated 3-6-03 in compliance of his orders, he joined
said post. Order of regularizing employees cancelled
on 10-6-03. Their Lordship held the right accrued to
petitioner when the order was passed on 3-6-03.
6234
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
The ratio cannot be applied to the case at hand as
the facts are not comparable. Workman has not produced
appointment letter.
13.
Considering the ratio held in AIR-1980 -SC-1459 as
workman was not given opportunity of hearing before
discharge of his service, the discharge order/ termination
is in violation of Article 311 of the constitution and therefore
cannot be upheld. For above reasons, I record my finding
in Point No.1 in Affirmative.
14.
Point No.2- in view of my finding in Point No.1 that
termination of workman is not legal, question arises to
what relief the workman is entitled? Whether the workman
is entitled for reinstatement with back wages. Workman
was appointed as casual gangman. He worked for 2 ½
months. His experience certificate was found fake as such
his services were terminated. Workman in his evidence on
affidavit has not disclosed what work he is doing since
termination of his service. Management’s witness also not
stated whether workman is in gainful employment.
Considering the facts and circumstances of case,
reinstatement of workman with 25 % back wages would
be appropriate. Accordingly I record my finding in Point
No.2.
15.
In the result, award is passed as under:-
(1)
The action of the management of South Eastern
Railway in terminating the services of Shri Avadhram
orally w.e.f. 13-5-90 is not legal and proper.
(2)
IInd party is directed to reinstate workman as casual
gangman with continuity of service and 25 % back
wages.
Amount as per above order shall be paid to workman
within 30 days from the date of notification of award. In
case of default, amount shall carry 9 % interest per annum
from the date of award till its realization.
16.
Let the copies of the award be sent to the Government
of India, Ministry of Labour & Employment as per rules.
R. B. PATLE, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 8 flrEcj] 2014
dk-vk- 2461-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947
dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj èku y{eh cSad
fy- ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp
vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd
vfèkdj.k] v#ukdqye ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 26@2010) dks
izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 8@9@2014 dks izkIr gqvk
FkkA
¹la- ,y&12012@05@2010&vkbZvkj (ch&I)º
lqefr ldykuh] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh
New Delhi, the 8th September, 2014
S.O. 2461.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 26/2010)
of the Cent. Govt. Indus. Tribunal-cum-Labour Court,
Ernakulam as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial
dispute between the management of Dhanalakshim Bank
Ltd. and their workmen, received by the Central
Government on 08/09/2014.
[No. L-12012/05/2010-IR (B-I)]
SUMATI SAKLANI, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,
ERNAKULAM
Present
: Shri.D.Sreevallabhan, B.Sc., LL.B, Presiding
Officer
(Wednesday the 30th day of July, 2014/8th Shravana 1936)
ID No. 26/2010
Workman
: Shri Karnal Ranganath
S/o Shri Thevamadathil Anandaraya Iyer
Rappal Desam, Parappukkara Village
Mukundapuram Taluk
Trichur
Kerala State
By Adv. Shri V J James
Management : The Assistant General Manager(HR)
Dhanalakshmi Bank Ltd.
P B No.9, Dhanalakshrni Building
Naickanal
Thrissur (Kerala) - 680001
By M/s.B S Krishnan Associates
This case coming up for final hearing on 24.07.2014
and this Tribunal-cum-Labour Court on 30.07.2014 passed
the following:
AWARD
In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of
sub-section(l) and sub-section (2A) of Section 10 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Government
of India/Ministry of Labour as per Order No-L-12012/05/
2010-IR(B-I) dated 12.08.2010 referred the industrial dis-
pute to this tribunal for adjudication.
2.
The dispute is:
“Whether the action of the management of
Dhanalakshrni Bank Ltd., Thrissur, in dismissing the
services of Shri Kamal Ranganath, Clerk, is legal
and justified? If not, what relief the concerned
workman is entitled to?”
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6235
3.
After appearance of the parties and submission of
pleadings the case was posted for evidence. Evidence was
adduced from both sides. Afterwards it was submitted by
the learned counsel for both sides that there is chance for
settlement and hence the case is to be posted in the Lok
Adalath. It was taken up in the Lok Adalath as agreed to by
both parties. The matter was settled between the parties
by entering into a full and final settlement. They have jointly
filed compromise incorporating the terms of the settlement.
Hence an award can be passed in terms of the compromise.
4.
In the result an award is passed in terms of the
compromise which will form the part of the award. The
award will come into force one month after its publication
in the Official Gazette.
Dictated to the Personal Assistant, transcribed and
typed by her, corrected and passed by me on this the 30th
day of July, 2014.
D. SREEVALLABHAN, Presiding Officer
APPENDIX - NIL
IN THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL
TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT, ERNAKULAM
ID No. 26/2010
Shri Kamal Ranganath
.....Workman
Vs
Dhanalaxmi Bank Ltd.
.....Management
The matter was taken up in Lok Adalat and the parties
agreed to settle the dispute on the following terms:—
1.
The management agrees to appoint the workman in
service as a fresh clerk. The workman will not be
eligible for any back wages or any benefits, what so
ever, including gratuity, for his past service with the
bank.
2.
The workman agrees to the above conditions and
undertakes that he will not make any claim, under
any circumstances, what so ever, for the back wages,
or any benefits for his past service with the bank.
3.
The management agrees to issue the order of
appointment to the workman, as above, within 30
days from the date of receipt of the copy of the
settlement.
Both the parties agree to the above terms and
conditions and agree to pass an award in terms of this
compromise.
Dated this the 24th day of July, 2014.
Workman : -Sd/-
Management : -Sd/-
Counsel for
Counsel for
Workman: -Sd/-
Management : -Sd/-
-Sd/-
Mediator
ubZ fnYyh] 8 flrEcj] 2014
dk-vk- 2462-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947
dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj LVsV cSad vkWiQ
ifV;kyk ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds
chp vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd
vfèkdj.k] p.Mhx<+ ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 20@2011) dks izdkf'kr
djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 8@9@2014 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&12011@44@2011&vkbZvkj (ch&I)º
lqefr ldykuh] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh
New Delhi, the 8th September, 2014
S.O. 2462.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 20/2011)
of the Cent. Govt. Indus. Tribunal-cum-Labour Court
No. 1, Chandigarh as shown in the Annexure, in the
industrial dispute between the management of State Bank
of Patiala and their workmen, received by the Central
Government on 08/09/2014.
[No. L-12011/44/2011-IR (B-I)]
SUMATI SAKLANI, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE SHRI SURENDRA PRAKASH SINGH,
PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVT.
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT-I,
CHANDIGARH
Case No. ID 20 of 2011
Reference No. L-12011/44/2011-IR(B-I) dated 25.10.2011
Shri Jarnail Singh
Son of Shri Lekh Ram,
resident of Vill. Chajjumajra,
Post Office Landran,
Teh. Kharar, Punjab
C/o The President,
SC/ST Employees Welfare Association,
Chandigarh Circle (C) House No. 3086/2,
Sector-44-D, Chandigarh.
....Workman
Versus
1.
The Chief Manager,
State Bank of Patiala,
PPFG Department,
Head Office, The Mall,
Patiala (Punjab).
...Respondent
Appearances :
For the Workman
:
None.
For the Management
:
Sh. N. K. Zakhmi
6236
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
AWARD
Passed on:-4.8.2014
Government of India Ministry of Labour vide
notification No. L-12011/44/2011-IR(B-I) dated 25.10.2011
has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for
adjudication:
Term of Reference:
“Whether the action of the management of State
Bank of Patiala, Patiala in not considering Shri Jarnail
Singh, Peon as member of Pension Fund Scheme
despite showing him as pension fund optee in his
salary slips and not paying him contributory PF till
2009, is legal and justified? To what relief the
workman is entitled?”
2.
Case called repeatedly. None appeared on behalf of
the workman despite appearance on behalf of the workman
in the past. None is present to pursue the case of the
workman. For Management Sh. N.K. Zakhmi is present. It
appears that the workman is not interested to pursue with
the present reference. The same is returned to the Central
Govt. for want of prosecution. Central Govt. be informed.
Soft as well as hard copy be sent to the Central Govt. for
publication.
S. P. SINGH, Presiding Officer
Chandigarh
04.08.2014
ubZ fnYyh] 8 flrEcj] 2014
dk-vk- 2463-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947
dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj nf{k.k ekykckj
xzkeh.k cSad ds izca/ra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds
chp vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd
vfèkdj.k v:ukoqQye ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 11@2010) dks
izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 8@9@2014 dks izkIr gqvk
FkkA
¹la- ,y&12012@48@2009&vkbZvkj (ch&I)º
lqefr ldykuh] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh
New Delhi, the 8th September, 2014
S.O. 2463.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 11/2010)
of the Ernakulam as shown in the Annexure, in the
industrial dispute between the management of South
Malabar Gramin Bank and their workmen, received by the
Central Government on 08/09/2014.
[No. L-12012/48/2009-IR (B-I)]
SUMATI SAKLANI, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,
ERNAKULAM
Present : Shri D. SREEVALLABHAN, B.Sc., LL.B,
Presiding Officer
(Tuesday the 22nd day of July, 2014/31st Ashadha, 1936)
ID No. 11/2010
Workman
: Shri K Vijayan
S/o Shri K Kannan Krishna,
O.O., 14/653 D, Pantheerankavu P O,
Kozhikode - 19
By M/s. M. R. Singh & Company
Management : The Chairman,
South Malabar Gramin Bank,
Head Office, Post Box No.10,
Malappuram
By Advs. Shri T. R. Ravi & Shri Ashok
B. Shenoy
This case coming up for final hearing on 30.06.2014
and this Tribunal-cum-Labour Court on 22.07.2014 passed
the following:
AWARD
In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of
sub-section (1) and sub-section (2A) of Section 10 of
the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the
Government of India/Ministry of Labour vide its Order
No. L-12012/48/2009-IR(B-I) dated 07.01.2010 has referred
the industrial dispute scheduled therein for adjudication
to this tribunal.
2.
The dispute is:
‘Whether the action of the management of South
Malabar Gramin Bank in imposing the penalty of
dismissal from the services w.e.f. 04.04.1996 on Shri
Vijayan K is justified? If not, what relief he is entitled
to and from which date?’
3.
The workman had joined as Clerk in the service of
the management bank in the year 1990. He was confirmed
in service on 11.02.1991. While he was working in the
Kalpatta branch of the management bank he was dismissed
from service on 04.04.1996 for habitual absenteeism by
invoking the power under Regulation 30(2) of the South
Malabar Gramin Bank Staff Service Regulations, 1980.
Challenge is made as to the legality and justifiability of the
order of dismissal by raising this industrial dispute.
4.
The allegations in the claim statement put in by the
workman after his appearance in this case, in a nutshell,
are that he was effectively and promptly discharging his
duties after joining the service of the bank in the year 1990
as Clerk-cum-Cashier and his work was very much
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6237
appreciated on many occasions through letters and by
issuing certificates. Unfortunately he was bed ridden due
to rheumatic arthritis while working in the Kalpatta branch
and had to undergo prolonged continuous treatment for a
long time. Hence he was unable to attend his official duties
and for each and every absence he had submitted
application for leave. On 31.01.1995 the Chairman of the
South Malabar Gramin Bank, Malappuram issued a show
cause notice to him and to which a detailed explanation
dated 03.08.1995 was submitted by him through proper
channel. Later the Chairman published a notice in
Mathrubhumi daily dated 04.04.1996 about his termination
from service. The termination notice was issued without
conducting any domestic enquiry and without affording
opportunity to the workman to defend in utter violation of
the principles of natural justice. Workman submitted a
representation dated 10.04.1996 to the Chairman and
without considering it a letter dated 23.04.1996 was issued
advising him to file an appeal to the Board of Directors of
the management bank. Thereby he had filed an appeal
before the Board of Directors of the bank but it was
dismissed. Against the order of dismissal the workman
filed OP No.7246/2002 before the Hon’ble High Court of
Kerala. It was closed without prejudice to the right of the
workman to seek legal redress if any. He has not been
gainfully employed since the date of termination and still
remains unemployed. He belongs to Schedule Caste and
is a member of Valluva community. His family consists of
his aged parents suffering from geriatric ailments, his wife
and child and an unemployed unmarried sister. All of them
are depending on him for their livelihood. His termination
from service is illegal and it is only a calculated and pre-
planned attempt of the management to drive him out of
service for wreaking vengeance. Hence it is prayed to set
aside the termination order and direct the management
bank to reinstate him in service with full back wages and
all service benefits.
5.
Management filed written statement challenging the
maintainability of the order of reference on the ground
that the claim of the workman became stale as there was
inordinate delay in raising the industrial dispute. It is
contended that he was dismissed from service w.e.f.
04.04.1996 due to his continuous unauthorized absence
without prior permission and leave application. After
joining service in the year 1990 as probationary junior
clerk and confirmation on 11.02.1991 he was working in
the Kalpatta Branch of the management bank from
02.01.1992 onwards. While so he was in the habit of
unauthorizedly absenting himself from duties and during
the period from 17.10.1993 to 23.07.1994 he had absented
from duty unauthorizedly on ten occasions. His absence
for 162 days during that period was treated as absence
without leave on loss of pay by order dated 01.08.1994.
From 07.07.1994 to 06.06.1995 he was continuously absent
from duties for 335 days and it was also treated as absence
without leave on loss of pay after sending several letters
for his non-adherence to leave rules. After the continuous
spell of unauthorized absence for 335 days he was again
on unauthorized absence without leave and on loss of
pay on 14.06.1995, from 21.06.1995 to 25.07.1995,
11.08.1995, 24.08.1995, 11.09.1995, 16.09.1995, 10.11.1995,
14.11.1995, 16.11.1995, 20.11.1995, 23.12.1995, 27.12.1995,
02.01.1996 to 06.01.1996, 11.01.1996, 20.01.1996, 24.01.1996
and 29.01.1996. Thus during the 27 months from 17.10.1993
to 29.01.1996 he was unauthorizedly absent without leave
and on loss of pay for a total of 535 days. On 28.02.1994 it
was noted in his service records that he had disobeyed
orders and directions of the superiors, violated the bank’s
standing instructions and issued cheques without having
sufficient funds in his account in the branch ignoring the
instructions of the manager. On that day a chargesheet
was issued to him with regard to the issuance of thirteen
cheques on different dates without keeping enough funds
in his account. All the cheques were returned unpaid and
the manager of Kalpatta branch had instructed him on
10.08.1993 to surrender all the unused cheque leaves with
him. Ignoring the instruction he had issued five more
cheques after the receipt of the letter intimating the
instruction. On 23.08.1994 he was issued with a
chargesheet for unauthorized absence and for issuance
of cheques without sufficient funds. In the letter dated
28.01.1995 addressed to the Manager, Industrial Relations
Cell by the Manager, Personal Administration of the
management bank for transferring the files relating to his
unauthorized absence it was stated that the workman was
asked by the Branch Manager in writing to appear before
Dr. T. Bharghava, Govt. Civil Surgeon for medical check-
up through his letter dated 15.12.1994 but it was returned
as unclaimed. It was also stated therein that all the letters
sent from the branch in the address given by him were
returned as unclaimed. On 31.01.1995 the Chairman of the
management bank issued a show cause notice to him
detailing the unauthorized absence and stating that it had
become impracticable to communicate with him. Since he
was habitually absent affecting the discipline he was asked
to show cause why he should not be dismissed as per
Regulations 30(1) and 30(2) of the Staff Regulations
governing him. The show cause notice sent through
registered post was returned unclaimed. It could be served
in person only on 26.07.1995 when he came to join duty.
While so his request for leave from 01.04.1995 to 30.04.1995
sent through registered post was rejected by the bank on
22.04.1995. He had submitted his explanation to the show
cause notice on 07.08.1995 stating that he was bed ridden
due to rheumatic fever from 17.10.1993 onwards and making
request to take a lenient view. He also made request to
pardon him for not informing the change of address during
6238
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
his leave period. While so the enquiry with respect to the
chargesheet issued to him on 28.02.1994 was completed
and a report was submitted with the finding that the
charges are proved. On 10.02.1996 the disciplinary
authority issued show cause notice proposing the
stoppage of two increments as penalty for the proved
charges. He had absconded from 01.02.1996 violating the
undertaking in the explanation to the show cause notice
that he will not be on unauthorized absence any more.
Hence the management decided to dismiss him from
service. Since there was no effective method available to
serve the order a notice was published in the Mathrubhumi
daily on 04.04.1996 about the dismissal. On 10.04.1996 he
gave a representation with the prayer that he might not be
dismissed and with a request to give him a transfer to
Kozhikode stating that the climate at Wyanad was affecting
his health. On 23.04.1996 he was informed that he can
prefer an appeal if he was aggrieved by the order of
dismissal. The order of dismissal was served on him by
registered post on 18.04.1996. As per the Regulations the
appeal was to be filed within one month from the date of
the order but he did not prefer any appeal within that
period. While so the management received a letter dated
10.06.1996 from the Thamarassery branch of the Canara
Bank, which is the sponsor bank of the management bank,
informing that the workman along with his father had
availed three gold loans during July and August, 1994
pledging spurious gold ornaments and it was detected on
11.01.1996. On 22.01.1996 the Thamarassery branch of the
Canara Bank filed a complaint before the police against
him and his father. After preliminary enquiries the spurious
gold pledged were taken into custody by the police. It
may be the reason for the sudden absconding of the
workman from 01.02.1996. Three years after his dismissal
he preferred an appeal on 06.04.1999 before the Board of
Directors of the management with the prayer to set aside
the order of dismissal. The appeal was dismissed on
19.05.1999. Thereafter in February, 2002 he filed Original
Petition No.7246/2002(K) before the Hon’ble High Court
of Kerala challenging the order of dismissal. The OP was
closed on 13.07.2005 allowing the workman to raise an
industrial dispute. This industrial dispute was raised after
more than 2½ years after the closure of the OP. The
industrial dispute was raised with regard to the dismissal
of service effected 12 years back and it has become stale.
The dismissal of the workman from service on 04.04.1996
is legal, valid and bonafide. The complaint of the workman
that the dismissal of his service was effected without
conducting a domestic enquiry, without allowing him to
defend his position and in violation of the principles of
natural justice is untenable and unsustainable. Dismissal
was effected duly in terms of Regulation 30(2) of the South
Malabar Gramin Bank Staff Service Regulations, 1980
having due regard to the fact that it was impracticable to
communicate with the workman since he was absconding.
It is in no way illegal and if for any reason it would be
found by this Tribunal that the dismissal was not proper
or legal for want of an enquiry the management has to be
afforded an opportunity to adduce evidence. The
allegations as to illness, submission of leave applications
and non-employment are all false. Workman has been
gainfully employed ever since the dismissal from service.
There is no vengeance for the management towards him.
The management has lost confidence in him due to his
conduct which is unbecoming of an employee of a banking
institution. The antecedents of the workman, the position
he held in the bank etc. justifies the dismissal and he does
not deserve any leniency. Hence he is not entitled to any
relief.
6.
Workman filed rejoinder denying the contentions in
the written statement and reaffirming the allegations in
the claim statement.
7.
Evidence, both oral and documentary, was adduced
from both sides for the purpose of deciding this reference.
For the workman he was examined as WW1 and Exts.W1
to W32 were got marked. The documents produced by
the management pursuant to the direction given by this
Tribunal on the application of the workman were marked
as Exts.M16 series to M53 series. From the side of the
management one witness was examined as MW1 and
Exts.M1 to M15 were marked. After closing the evidence
the arguments for both sides were heard.
8.
The points for determination are:-
(i)
Whether the reference is maintainable?
(ii)
Whether the dismissal of the workman from
the services of the management bank is legal
and proper?
(iii)
Whether the penalty of dismissal imposed on
the workman calls for any interference by this
Tribunal?
(iv)
To what relief, if any, the workman is entitled
to?
9.
Point No. (i) : Challenge as to the maintainability is
made on the ground that the claims became stale due to
the inordinate delay in raising this industrial dispute. It is
after a period of twelve years after the order of dismissal
the dispute was raised by the workman. After taking the
decision by the management to dismiss him from service
Ext.M6 notice dated 30.03.1996 was sent to him through
registered post. It was also published in the Mathrubhumi
daily on 04.04.1996. After the dismissal he had given Ext.M8
representation dated 10.04.1996 with the prayer not to
proceed with the termination of his service and to permit
him to rejoin duty. In reply to it the management issued
Ext.M9 letter dated 23.04.1996 informing him that he was
dismissed from service w.e.f. 04.04.1996 and advising him
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6239
to appeal against the punishment imposed to the Board of
Directors of the Bank, if he so desires. Afterwards on
06.04.1999 he preferred an appeal challenging the order of
dismissal. Ext.M10 is the appeal petition submitted by
him. The appeal was dismissed on 19.05.1999. He was
informed about the dismissal of the appeal vide letter dated
27.05.1999 marked as Ext.M11. It was received by him on
15.06.1999 and the same is evidenced by Ext.M12.
Afterwards he had filed OP No.7246/2002(K) before the
Hon’ble High Court of Kerala challenging the dismissal
on 11.02.2002. It was closed without prejudice to the right
to seek legal redress, if any as per judgment dated
13.07.2005 copy of which is marked as Ext.M13.
10.
Pointing out the delay in filing the appeal, and the
OP before the Hon’ble High Court of Kerala as well as the
inordinate delay of 12 years in raising the industrial dispute
it was argued by the learned counsel for the management
that the claim became stale at the time of raising the dispute.
It was also submitted by him that the dispute was raised
only after 2½ years after the disposal of the above OP.
11.
By placing reliance on the decisions reported in
Nedungadi Bank Ltd. Vs. Madhavankutty AIR 2000 SC
839, Indian Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. Vs. Prahlad Sing AIR 2001
SC 69, Haryana State Coop. Land Development Bank Vs.
Neelam AIR 2005 SC 1843 and UP State Road Transport
Corporation Vs. Ram Singh and Another 2008 (17) SCC
627 it was argued by him that the delay in raising the
dispute in this case disentitles the workman to claim any
relief since the dispute has become stale. On the other
hand it was argued by the learned counsel for the workman
that the provisions of the Limitation Act are not applicable
to the proceedings under the Industrial Disputes Act and
workman is entitled to relief even if there is delay. Reliance
was placed by him on the decision reported in Ajaib Singh
Vs. Sirhind Coop. Marketing cum Processing Service
Society AIR 1999 SC 1351.
12.
In the decision referred to by the learned counsel
for the workman it was held that Article 137 of the Limitation
Act is not applicable to the Industrial Disputes Act and
the workman is entitled to relief even if there is delay.
13.
In Nedungadi Bank Ltd. Vs. Madhavankutty referred
to by the learned counsel for the management it was held:
“Law does not prescribe any time limit for the
appropriate Government to exercise its powers under
S.10 of the Act. It is not that this power can be
exercised at any point of time and to revive matters
which had since been settled. Power is to be
exercised reasonably and in a rational manner. There
appears to us to be no rational basis on which the
Central Govt. has exercised powers in this case after
a lapse of about seven years of order dismissing the
respondent from service. At the time reference was
made no industrial dispute existed or could be even
said to have been apprehended. A dispute which is
stale could not be the subject matter of reference
under S.10 of the Act. As to when a dispute can be
said to be stale would depend on the facts and
circumstances of each case. When the matter has
become final, it appears to us to be rather
incongruous that the reference be made under S.10
of the Act in the circumstances like the present one.
In fact it could be said that there was no dispute
pending at the time when the reference in question
was made”.
14.
In Indian Iron and Steel Co. Ltd. Vs. Prahlad Singh it
was held that in the case of an industrial dispute raised
after thirteen long years of termination of service without
reasonable explanation for such delay the Industrial
Tribunal can refuse to grant any relief.
15.
In Haryana State Coop. Land Development Bank
Vs. Neelam it was held that the object of imparting social
justice to the workman is not to automatically entitle a
workman to relief against the employer, irrespective of his
conduct and that the aim and object of the Industrial
Disputes Act may be to impart social justice to the
workman but the same by itself would not mean that
irrespective of his conduct a workman would automatically
be entitled to relief. The decision of Ajaib Singh referred
to by the learned counsel for the workman was considered
in that decision and it was held that it was rendered in the
fact situation obtaining therein and no ratio of universal
application can be culled out therefrom after pointing out
that the management did not raise any plea of delay in that
case.
16.
In UP State Road Transport Corporation Vs. Ram
Singh and Another it was pointed out that it was repeatedly
laid down in several decisions that while delay cannot by
itself be sufficient reason to reject an industrial dispute,
nevertheless the delay cannot be unreasonable and mere
fact that the workman was making repeated representations
would not justify his raising the issue before the Labour
Court after thirteen years.
17.
The provisions of the Limitation Act are not
applicable to the Industrial Tribunal. There is no prescribed
time limit for making reference. But it must be within a
reasonable time. There shall not be inordinate delay in
raising the industrial dispute by the workman. The
industrial dispute must exist at that time. In the above
referred decisions it has been categorically held that the
raising of the industrial dispute and its reference must be
within a reasonable time. It shall not be at any point of
time and if otherwise the records pertaining to an employee
might have been destroyed and it would be difficult to
obtain witnesses who be competent to give evidence so
6240
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
many years later if the Industrial Tribunal or Labour Court
wishes to hold a further enquiry into the matter.
18.
Here in this case admittedly the dismissal was on
04.04.1996. The appeal was filed by the workman
challenging the dismissal only after three years. After
receipt of the copy of the order dismissing the appeal, the
OP was filed before the Hon’ble High Court of Kerala after
about three years. After the dismissal of the OP on
13.07.2005 leaving him to seek legal redress, if any, the
dispute was raised by him only on 09.01.2008. It is about
twelve years after the dismissal the industrial dispute was
raised by him. There is no satisfactory explanation for the
inordinate delay in raising the dispute. It appears that it is
because of the lukewarm attitude of the workman that has
resulted in the undue delay in raising the dispute. He
could have raised the dispute within a reasonable time
after the dismissal of the appeal. Instead he had
approached the Hon’ble High Court of Kerala after a period
of about three years. Even after the disposal of the OP he
had not taken care to raise the industrial dispute for more
than 2½ years. There is unreasonable and unexplained
delay in raising the industrial dispute and hence it can be
held that the claim has become stale.
19.
Point No.(ii) : The validity of the order of dismissal
is mainly challenged on the ground that it was imposed
without conducting enquiry. Learned counsel for the
workman has submitted that it can only be treated as
termination from service as there was no enquiry. On the
other hand learned counsel for the management has argued
that there is no need to conduct an enquiry since the
penalty of dismissal was imposed on him by invoking the
power invested with the management under clause 30(2)
of the South Malabar Gramin Bank (Staff Service
Regulations, 1980) governing the service of the workman.
20.
Clause 30(1) to (3) of the said Regulations deals
with the penalties and the procedure to be followed for
the imposition of penalties. It reads thus:
“30(1)Without prejudice to the provisions of other
regulations,
an officer or employee who commits a breach of
these regulations or who displays negligence,
inefficiency or indolence, or who knowingly does
anything detrimental to the interests of the Bank or
in conflict with its instructions or who commits a
breach of discipline or is guilty of any other act of
misconduct, shall be liable to the following
penalties—
(a)
reprimand;
(b)
delay or stoppage of increments or promotion;
(c)
degradation to a lower post or grade or to a
lower stage in his incremental scale;
(d)
recovery from pay of the whole or part of any
pecuniary loss caused to the Bank by the
officer or employee;
(e)
removal from service which shall not be a
disqualification for future employment;
(f)
dismissal.
(2)
No officer or employee shall be subjected to the
penalties
referred to in clause (b), (c) (d), (e) or (f) of sub-
regulation (1) except by an order in writing signed
by the Chairman and no such order shall be passed
without the charge being formulated in writing and
given to the said officer or employee so that he shall
have reasonable opportunity to answer them in
writing or in person, as he prefers and in the latter
case his defence shall be taken down in writing and
read to him:
Provided that the requirements of this sub-regulation
may be waived, if the facts on the basis of which
action is to be taken have been established in a
court of law or court martial, or where the officer or
employee has absconded or where it is for any other
reason impracticable to communicate with him or
where there is difficulty in observing them and the
requirements can be waived without injustice to him.
In every case where all or any of the requirements of
this sub-regulation are waived, the reasons for so
doing shall be recorded in writing.
(3)
The inquiry under this regulation and the procedure
with the exception of the final order, may be delegated
in case the person against whom proceedings are
taken is an officer to any officer who is in grade
higher than such officer and in the case of an
employee to any officer. For purposes of the inquiry,
the officer or employee may not engage a legal
practitioner”.
21.
As per clause 30(2) the penalty of dismissal shall
not be imposed without a charge being formulated in
writing and given to the employee so as to have reasonable
opportunity to answer them in writing, or if in person, his
defence shall be taken down in writing and read to him.
The proviso further provides that the requirements can be
waived in certain circumstances. It can be waived if he
has absconded or it is for any other reason impracticable
to communicate with him.
22.
By placing reliance on the decisions reported in
Syndicate Bank Vs. General Secretary, Syndicate Bank Staff
Association and Another AIR 2000 SC 2198 and Regional
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6241
Manager, Bank of Baroda Vs. Anita Nandrajog 2009 (9)
SCC 462 it was argued by the learned counsel for the
management that it is not necessary to conduct an enquiry
if the principles of natural justice are inbuilt in the
provisions providing the procedure for termination or for
imposition of penalty. In the former decision referred to
by him it was held that the requirements of natural justice
stood satisfied even without holding a departmental
enquiry. The requirements of natural justice are considered
in para 16 of the judgment which reads thus :
“Now what are the requirements of principles of
natural justice, which are required to be observed?
These are:
(i)
A workman should know the nature of the
complaint or accusation;
(ii)
An opportunity to state his case; and
(iii)
The management should act in good faith
which means that the action of the
management should be fair, reasonable and
just”.
23.
In the latter case the legality of voluntary cessation
of service as per clause 17(b) of the Fifth Bipartite Settlement
was considered without conducting enquiry and held that
the termination is valid even without conducting an
enquiry.
24.
By placing reliance on the decisions reported in The
Workmen of M/s.Firestone Tyre & Rubber Co. of India P.
Ltd. Vs. The Management and others AIR 1973 SC 1227
and Gujarat Steel Tubes Ltd. etc. Vs. Gujarat Steel Tubes
Mazdoor Sabha and others AIR 1980 SC 1896 it was argued
by the learned counsel for the workman that it is obligatory
on the part of the employer to conduct an enquiry in the
case of imposition of punishment for misconduct.
25.
Clause 30(2) of the said Regulations do not expressly
provide for the conduct of an enquiry for the imposition
of the penalties under sub-clauses (b), (c), (d), (e) or (f) of
Clause 30(1) of the said Regulations. What is provided is
to formulate a charge in writing and to afford a reasonable
opportunity to the workman to answer. It does not mean
that no enquiry is to be conducted in all the cases of
imposition of penalty. It all depends upon the facts and
circumstances of each case. There may be cases when
the workman admits the charges levelled against him which
does not call for any enquiry. But when there is denial of
charges and the supporting allegations, it will become
necessary to conduct an enquiry otherwise it cannot be
said that reasonable opportunity was given to the
workman to state his case and hence there will be violation
of the principles of natural justice.
26.
It was argued by the learned counsel for the
management that the requirements under clause 30(1) is
not to be complied with in this case since it was
impracticable to communicate with the workman prior to
and after the issuance of Ext.M1, which expressly states
the charges levelled against him. It was also argued by
him that the workman fully admits the contents of Ext.M1
in Ext.M3 reply given by him and hence it does not invite
any enquiry.
27. There are specific allegations in Ext.M1 as to the
violation of the provisions of the Regulations by the
workman and also as to his misconduct. It is expressly
stated there in that it has become impracticable to
communicate with him. There are clear allegations as to
his habitual absenteeism from duties without obtaining
permission from the competent authority. It is expressly
stated therein that he had absented from duties for 162
days on ten occasions from 17.10.1993 to 23.07.1994 and
afterwards for 61 days from 24.07.1994 to 22.09.1994. There
is also specific mention that his absence from 23.09.1994
to 30.11.1994 was treated as absence without leave and
his request for leave from 01.12.1994 to 31.01.1995 was
rejected. It is also pointed out that the letter dated
15.12.1994 directing him to appear before Dr.T Bhargavan,
Civil Surgeon at 4:00 PM on 22.12.1994 for medical
examination and several other letters were returned with
reason “unclaimed, returned to sender”.
28.
Though Ext.M1 is styled as a show-cause notice it
would disclose the clear violation of the provisions of the
said Regulations as well as the misconduct of the workman.
There is no vagueness in the allegations contained in it.
Based on the decisions reported in Krishna Chandra
Tandon Vs. Union of India AIR1974 SC 1589 and
St.Thomas Missions Hospital Vs. State of Kerala &
Another 2007 (2) KLT 415 it can very well be held that the
charges are made specific without any ambiguity in Ext.M1
and hence it can be accepted as the charges levelled
against the workman though not styled as a charge sheet.
29.
In Ext.M3 reply the specific allegations in Ext.M1 as
to the absenteeism without permission and the
impracticability to communicate with him are admitted. He
would further admit that there was change of address and
seek pardon for his failure to inform it to the management.
The reason for absenteeism is stated to be severe attack
of rheumatic fever from 17.10.1993 and paralysis for quite
a long period. There is also the request for granting eligible
leave or leave on loss of pay for the period of his absence
in spite of the specific mention of treating his absence
from 23.09.1994 to 30.11.1994 as absence without leave
and as to the rejection of leave for the period from
01.12.1994 to 31.01.1995 in Ext.M1. There is also the
undertaking that he would not absent himself from duty
without permission in future.
30.
It was impracticable to communicate with him is
admitted to by the workman and in such a case the
6242
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
management can waive the requirements to be complied
with as per clause 30(2) of the said regulations.
31.
In Ext.M8 letter addressed to the Chairman by the
workman pursuant to the receipt of the communication as
to his dismissal it is expressly stated that in his explanation
dated 07.08.1995 it was submitted by him that he was
compelled to enter on leave without prior permission from
the competent authority. It is further stated that he could
not submit leave application in time as he was under
observation and treatment for chronic rheumatic
complaints. Therein also he made request for not
terminating him after undertaking that there would not be
any kind of such misconducts in his future service.
32.
As there is express admission of the chronic
absenteeism as well as the breach of the provisions of the
said Regulations the management can invoke the power
under Section 30(2) for the imposition of the penalty
without conducting enquiry especially in view of the
impracticability to communicate with him.
33.
In Himachal Road Transport Corporation and
Another Vs. Hukam Chand 2009(11) SCC 222 it was held
by the Apex Court that when there is employee’s own
admission of misconduct enquiry is not necessary.
34.
While considering the question of unauthorized
absence from duty by the workman it is relevant to go
through clause 22(1) and (2) of the said Regulations. It
reads thus:-
“22(1) An officer or employee shall not absent
himself from his duties without having obtained the
permission of the competent authority, nor shall be
absent himself in case of sickness or accident without
submitting a proper medical certificates.
(2) An officer or employee who absents himself from
duty without leave or overstays his leave, except
under circumstances beyond his control for which
he must tender a satisfactory explanation, shall not
be entitled to draw any pay and allowances for the
period of such absence or overstayal, and shall
further be liable to such disciplinary measure as the
competent authority may impose”.
35.
It is also necessary to look into the provisions with
regard to privilege leave and sick leave. Clause 46 deals
with privilege leave and it reads as follows:-
“46(1) Applications for privilege leave shall
ordinarily be submitted by the officer or employee
at least one month before the date from which leave
is required.
(2) Applications which do not satisfy the
requirements of sub-regulation (1) may be refused
without reason being stated”.
36.
Clause 50 dealing with sick leave reads thus :
“50. An officer or employee shall be eligible to 20
days of sick leave for each completed year of service.
Such leave can be accumulated up to 180 days and
may be availed of only on production of medical
certificate by a medical practitioner acceptable to
the Bank or, at the Bank’s discretion, nominated by
it at its cost”.
37.
As per clause 17 of the said Regulations every officer
or employee of the Bank shall conform to and abide by
these regulations and shall observe, comply with and obey
all orders and directions which may from time to time be
given to him by any person or persons under whose
jurisdiction, superintendence or control he may for the
time being be placed.
38.
In the case of the workman there is the admission as
to shifting of residence without informing the bank. As
per clause 23 of the said regulations an officer or employee
if so required by the competent authority, must not absent
himself from his station overnight without obtaining
previous sanction from the Chairman if he himself holds
the post of a Manager and from the Officer-in-charge or
Manager in other cases.
39.
Here in this case the failure to conduct enquiry does
not affect materially for the above said reasons. Apart
from that both workman and management have adduced
evidence before this tribunal in support of their respective
pleas. It is the case of the workman that he had absented
himself from duty from 17.10.1993 continuously on several
occasions due to rheumatic arthritis and he had submitted
leave applications for his absence during the entire period.
Pursuant to the direction given by this Tribunal to the
management as per the request made by the workman for
production of the leave applications and the medical
certificates management has produced all the leave
applications and medical certificates and the same were
marked as Exts.M16 series to M53 series. There was no
request for producing the order granting or rejecting those
leave applications. In Exts.M3 and M7 the reason stated
for his unauthorized absence is that he was bed ridden
due to rheumatic arthritis from 17.10.1993. In the claim
statement also there is the specific plea that it is because
of rheumatic arthritis he was absenting from duty. He has
no case that it was for any other reason he had absented
himself from attending duty. But on production of those
leave applications it has come out that it was not because
of rheumatic arthritis he was absenting from duties.
Exts.M16 series to M38 series are the leave applications
submitted by him for his absence on several occasions
during the period from 17.10.1993 to 31.01.1995. It is with
regard to the unauthorized absence during that period
Ext.M1 was issued to him to submit his explanation. The
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6243
reason stated in any one of those leave applications is not
rheumatic arthritis. It is interesting to note that the reason
for leave stated in Exts.M19 and M20 for availing leave
from 20.12.1993 to 24.12.1993 is Sabarimala pilgrimage. In
several leave applications sickness is stated to be the
reason for leave. From the medical certificates
accompanying with those leave applications it can be seen
that he was not undergoing treatment for rheumatic arthritis
at that time. During the cross-examination of the workman
when examined as WW1 it was stated by him that it was
only in the year 1995 he was found to have been affected
by rheumatic arthritis. For the purpose of deciding this
case it is only to be considered whether he was
unauthorisedly absenting himself during the period from
17.10.1993 to 31.01.1995. It was admitted by him during
his cross-examination that for his absence for 162 days
during the period from October, 1993 to July, 1994 order
was issued to him treating those 162 days as absence
without leave on loss of pay. It was stated by him that he
did not remember whether any appeal was filed or any
other step was taken challenging that order. It was admitted
by him that leave applications were submitted on several
occasions after availing the leave. There is also evidence
to prove that there was no leave in his credit at the time of
submitting some of the leave applications.
40.
In the proof affidavit of MW1 there are specific
averments as to his unauthorized absence of 162 days
from 17.10.1993 to 23.07.1994 on ten occasions. Further it
is averred that it was treated as absence without leave on
loss of pay by order dated 01.08.1994. No challenge has
been made about it during his cross-examination. There is
also the averment in his proof affidavit that from 07.07.1994
to 06.06.1995 the workman was continuously absenting
from duties for 335 days and that it was treated as absence
without leave on loss of pay after issuing several letters
to him for his non-adherence to leave rules. There is no
challenge with regard to it during his cross-examination.
The averment in the proof affidavit of MW1 that during
the period from 17.10.1993 to 10.11.1996 the workman was
absent without leave unauthorisedly on loss of pay for a
total of 535 days also stands unchallenged during his
cross-examination.
41.
According to the workman he had submitted leave
applications on all the occasions before or after availing
the leave. Submission of leave application by itself is not
sufficient for availing the leave. In the decision reported
in Delhi Transport Corporation Vs. Sardar Singh AIR 2004
SC 4161 it was held that when an employee absents himself
from duty without sanctioned leave, the authority can come
to a conclusion about the employee being habitually
negligent in duties and an exhibited lack of interest in the
employer’s work.
42.
The entitlement of an employee is to apply for leave.
The grant of leave is a condition for its enjoyment. Leave
not granted cannot be availed and enjoyed. In this case
there is sufficient evidence to prove that there was rejection
of leave applications submitted by the workman during
the relevant period.
43.
There is ample evidence in this case to prove that
the workman was unauthorisedly absenting himself from
duty on several occasions during the period from
17.10.1993 to 31.01.1995. It is also proved that there is
clear violation of the provisions contained in the said
regulations by him. Taking into consideration of the
continuous absence of duty unauthorisedly on several
occasions by the workman in between the period from
17.10.1993 to 31.01.1995 without prior permission
management has got the right to invoke the power under
clause 30(2) of the said regulations to impose the penalty
of dismissal.
44.
Point No. (iii) : Workman was imposed with the
penalty of dismissal for his chronic absenteeism without
prior permission. It cannot be said to be termination of
service coming within the purview of clause 10(2) of the
said Regulations. He was absenting himself prior to the
issuance of Ext.M1 and also afterwards. Exts.W1 to W24
were produced from the side of the workman to satisfy
that his work was very much appreciated during the period
from 1990 to 1992. It was argued by the learned counsel
for the workman that it also requires consideration in the
matter of imposition of penalty. Learned counsel for the
management submitted that the workman was imposed
with the penalty of barring two increments after conducting
an enquiry with regard to the violation of instructions
given to him for not issuing cheques without sufficient
funds in his account. It was also submitted that he was
convicted in a criminal case charged against him for
pledging spurious gold ornaments in the Thamarassery
branch of the Canara Bank. The barring of increments
after conducting enquiry is not disputed by the workman.
It was stated by him during his cross-examination that he
was acquitted in the criminal case by the Sessions Court,
Kozhikode. The penalty imposed by the management is
to be interfered with only when it is shockingly
disproportionate to the alleged misconduct. Taking into
consideration of the entire facts and circumstances there
is no reason to interfere with the penalty imposed on the
workman. Hence I find that the action of the management
of South Malabar Gramin Bank in imposing the penalty of
dismissal from the services w.e.f.04.04.1996 on the workman
is justified.
45.
Point No.(iv) : In the result an award is passed
holding that the action of the management in imposing
the penalty of dismissal on the workman from service is
justified. Hence he is not entitled to any relief.
6244
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
The award will come into force one month after its
publication in the Official Gazette.
Dictated to the Personal Assistant, transcribed and
typed by her, corrected and passed by me on this the 22nd
day of July, 2014.
D. SREEVALLABHAN, Presiding Officer
APPENDIX
Witness for the workman
WW1
07.06.2013
Shri K Vijayan
Witness for the management
MW1
30.12.2013
Shri C G Sethumadhavan
Exhibits for the workman
W1
-
Appreciation letter dated 08.03.1990 issued
by the Senior Manager of the management
bank to the workman
W2
-
Appreciation letter dated 12.03.1990 issued
by the Senior Manager of the management
bank to the workman
W3
-
Greeting letter dated 09.03.1990 issued by
the General Manager of the management
bank to the workman
W4
-
Greeting letter dated 31.03.1990 issued by
the General Manager of the management
bank to the workman
W5
-
Greeting letter dated 31.05.1990 issued by
the General Manager of the management
bank to the workman
W6
-
Greeting letter dated 17.07.1990 issued by
the General Manager of the management
bank to the workman
W7
-
Greeting letter dated 12.09.1990 issued by
the General Manager of the management
bank to the workman
W8
-
Copy of Circular No.Dev.Cir.155/90-91
dated 07.11.1990 issued by the General
Manager of the management bank
W9
-
Letter dated 09.11.1990 addressed to the
workman by the Senior Manager of the
management bank
W10
-
Greeting letter dated 28.11.1990 issued by
the General Manager of the management
bank to the workman
W11
-
Copy of Circular No.Dev.Cir.180/90-91:P&D
dated 17.12.1990 issued by the General
Manager of the management bank
W12
-
Letter dated 19.12.1990 addressed to the
workman by the Senior Manager of the
management bank
W13
-
Copy of Circular No.Dev.Cir.217/90-91
dated 12.01.1991 issued by the General
Manager of the management bank
W14
-
Letter dated 15.01.1991 addressed to the
workman by the Senior Manager of the
management bank
W15
-
Copy of Circular No.Dev.Cir.245/90-91
dated 04.02.1991 issued by the General
Manager of the management bank
W16
-
Greeting Letter dated 26.02.1991 issued by
the Senior Manager (Planning & Dev.
Section) of the management bank to the
workman
W17
-
Greeting Letter dated 28.02.1991 issued by
the Senior Manager(Planning & Dev.
Section) of the management bank to the
workman
W18
-
Greeting Letter dated 01.06.1991 issued by
the Senior Manager (Planning & Dev.
Section) of the management bank to the
workman
W19
-
Invitation letter dated 12.08.1991 addressed
to the workman by the Area Manager of
the management bank
W20
-
Appreciation letter dated 07.03.1992 issued
by the Area Manager of the management
bank to the workman
W21
-
True photocopy of Certificate of Merit
dated Nil issued by the Chairman of the
management bank to the workman
W22
-
True photocopy of Certificate of Merit
dated Nil issued by the Chairman of the
management bank to the workman
W23
-
Greeting letter dated 09.06.1992 issued by
the General Manager of the management
bank to the workman
W24
-
Greeting letter dated 31.01.1994 issued by
the Area Manager of the management bank
to the workman
W25
-
True photocopy of Show Cause Notice
dated 31.01.1995 issued by the Chairman
of the management bank to the workman
W26
-
True photocopy of reply dated 07.08.1995
submitted by the workman to the Chairman
of the management bank
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6245
W27
-
True photocopy of notice dated 30.03.1996
W28
-
True photocopy of representation dated
10.04.1996 submitted by the workman to
the Chairman of the management bank
W29
-
True copy of letter No.9/SMGB/E.149/76/
96-97/IR dated 23.04.1996 of the Chairman
of the management bank to the workman
W30
-
True copy of the appeal petition dated
06.04.1999 filed by the workman before the
Appellate Authority
W31
-
True copy of the Judgment dated
13.07.2005 in OP No.7246/2002(K) of the
Hon’ble High Court of Kerala, Ernakulam
W32
-
True copy of the letter dated 09.01.2008
addressed to the Assistant Labour
Commissioner, Kochi by the workman
Exhibits for the management
M1
-
Show Cause notice dated 31.01.1995 issued
to the workman by the Chairman of the
management bank
M2
-
True copy of South Malabar Gramin Bank
(Staff) Service Regulations 1980 with
Amendment Regulations-1982
M3
-
Reply dated 07.08.1995 submitted by the
workman to the Chairman of the
management bank
M4
-
Letter dated 03.04.1996 addressed to the
workman by the Chairman of the
management bank
M5
-
Acknowledgment Card dated 15.04.1996
M6
-
Notice dated 30.03.1996 issued by the
Chairman (Disciplinary authority) of the
management bank to the workman
M7
-
Paper publication in the Kozhikode edition
of the Mathrubhumi Daily dated 04.04.1996
M8
-
Representation dated 10.04.1996 submitted
to the Chairman of the management bank
by the workman
M9
-
Letter No.9/SMGB/E.149/76/96-97/IR dated
23.04.1996 issued by the Chairman
(Disciplinary Authority) of the management
bank to the workman
M10
-
Appeal petition dated 06.04.1999 filed by
the workman before the management bank
M11
-
Letter dated 27.05.1999 addressed to the
workman by the General Manager of the
management bank
M12
-
Acknowledgment Card dated 02.06.1999
M13
-
True copy of the Judgment in OP No.7246/
2002(K) dated 13.07.2005 of the Hon’ble
High Court of Kerala, Ernakulam
M14
-
Letter dated 10.06.1996 addressed to the
Industrial Relations Cell, South Malabar
Gramin Bank, Malappuram by the Manager/
Accountant, Thamarassery Branch of the
Canara Bank
M15
-
Letter dated 25.07.1996 addressed to the
Industrial Relations Cell, South Malabar
Gramin Bank, Malappuram by the
Accountant/Manager, Thamarassery
Branch of the Canara Bank
M16
-
Leave application dated 06.11.1993
M16 (a)
-
Medical Certificate dated 17.10.1993
M16 (b)
-
Fitness Certificate dated 16.11.1993
M17
-
Leave application dated 04.12.1993
M18
-
Leave application dated 14.12.1993
M19
-
Leave application dated 18.12.1993
M-20
-
Leave application dated 27.12.1993
M-21
-
Leave application dated 05.02.1994
M-21 (a)
-
Medical Certificate dated 01.02.1994
M-22
-
Leave application dated 11.02.1994
M-22 (a)
-
Medical Certificate dated 11.02.1994
M-23
-
Leave application dated 21.02.1994
M-23 (a)
-
Medical Certificate dated 21.02.1994
M-24
-
Leave application dated 27.02.1994
M-24 (a)
-
Medical Certificate dated 27.02.1994
M-25
-
Leave application dated 06.03.1994
M-25 (a)
-
Medical Certificate dated 09.03.1994
M-26
-
Leave application dated 01.04.1994
M-26 (a)
-
Medical Certificate dated 01.04.1994
M-27
-
Leave application dated 18.04.1994
M-27 (a)
-
Medical Certificate dated 18.04.1994
M-27 (b)
-
Fitness Certificate dated 01.05.1994
M-28
-
Leave application dated 02.06.1994
M-28 (a)
-
Medical Certificate dated 30.05.1994
M-28 (b)
-
Fitness Certificate dated 02.06.1994
M-29
-
Leave application dated 07.06.1994
M-29 (a)
-
Medical Certificate dated 04.06.1994
6246
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
M-29 (b)
-
Fitness Certificate dated 07.06.1994
M-30
-
Leave application dated 23.06.1994
M-30 (a)
-
Medical Certificate dated 21.06.1994
M-30 (b)
-
Fitness Certificate dated 23.06.1994
M-31
-
Leave application dated 04.07.1994
M-31 (a)
-
Medical Certificate dated 27.06.1994
M-31 (b)
-
Fitness Certificate dated 03.07.1994
M-32
-
Leave application dated 07.07.1994
M-32 (a)
-
Medical Certificate dated 07.07.1994
M-33
-
Leave application dated 12.07.1994
M-33 (a)
-
Medical Certificate dated 12.07.1994
M-34
-
Leave application dated 17.07.1994
M-34 (a)
-
Medical Certificate dated 17.07.1994
M-35
-
Leave application dated 05.09.1994
M-35 (a)
-
Medical Certificate dated 24.07.1994
M-36
-
Leave application dated 23.09.1994
M-36 (a)
-
Medical Certificate dated 23.09.1994
M-37
-
Leave application dated 23.10.1994
M-37 (a)
-
Medical Certificate dated 23.10.1994
M-38
-
Leave application dated 01.12.1994
M-38 (a)
-
Medical Certificate dated 01.12.1994
M-39
-
Leave application dated 01.02.1995
M-39 (a)
-
Medical Certificate dated 01.02.1995
M-40
-
Leave application dated 01.04.1995
M-40 (a)
-
Medical Certificate dated 01.04.1995
M-41
-
Leave application dated 01.05.1995
M-41 (a)
-
Medical Certificate dated 01.05.1995
M-42
-
Leave application dated 07.06.1995
M-42 (a)
-
Medical Certificate dated 31.05.1995
M-42 (b)
-
Fitness Certificate dated 07.06.1995
M-43
-
Leave application dated 26.07.1995
M-43 (a)
-
Medical Certificate dated 21.06.1995
M-43 (b)
-
Fitness Certificate dated 26.07.1995
M-44
-
Leave application dated 26.12.1995
M-44 (a)
-
Medical Certificate dated 23.12.1995
M-44 (b)
-
Fitness Certificate dated 24.12.1995
M-45
-
Leave application dated 28.12.1995
M-45 (a)
-
Medical Certificate dated 27.12.1995
M-45 (b)
-
Fitness Certificate dated 28.12.1995
M-46
-
Leave application dated 16.01.1996
M-46 (a)
-
Medical Certificate dated 11.01.1996
M-46 (b)
-
Fitness Certificate dated 12.01.1996
M-47
-
Leave application dated 19.01.1996
M-47 (a)
-
Medical Certificate dated 17.01.1996
M-47 (b)
-
Fitness Certificate dated 19.01.1996
M-48
-
Leave application dated 23.01.1996
M-48 (a)
-
Medical Certificate dated 20.01.1996
M-48 (b)
-
Fitness Certificate dated 21.01.1996
M-49
-
Leave application dated 25.01.1996
M-49 (a)
-
Medical Certificate dated 24.01.1996
M-49 (b)
-
Fitness Certificate dated 25.01.1996
M-50
-
Leave application dated 29.01.1996
M-50 (a)
-
Medical Certificate dated 29.01.1996
M-50 (b)
-
Fitness Certificate dated 30.01.1996
M-51
-
Leave application dated 08.02.1996
M-51 (a)
-
Medical Certificate dated 31.01.1996
M-52
-
Leave application dated 02.03.1996
M-52 (a)
-
Medical Certificate dated 17.02.1996
M-53
-
Leave application dated 08.01.1996
M-53 (a)
-
Medical Certificate dated 02.01.1996
M-53 (b)
-
Fitness Certificate dated 07.01.1996
ubZ fnYyh] 8 flrEcj] 2014
dk-vk- 2464-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947
dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj bySfDVªdy
yksdks lsM xkse iwoZ eè; jsyos izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj
muds deZdkjksa ds chp vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa
dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k èkuckn ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k
72@2007) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 8@9@2014
dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&41012@1@2006&vkbZvkj (ch&I)º
lqefr ldykuh] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh
New Delhi, the 8th September, 2014
S.O. 2464.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 72/
2007) of the Cent. Govt. Indus. Tribunal-cum-Labour Court
N0. 2, Dhanbad as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial
dispute between the management of Electric Loco Shed
Gomoh, Eastern Central Railway and their workmen,
received by the Central Government on 08/09/2014
[No. L-41012/1/2006-IR (B-I)]
SUMATI SAKLANI, Section Officer
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6247
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL (NO. 2), AT DHANBAD.
PRESENT : Shri Kishori Ram, Presiding Officer.
In the matter of an Industrial Dispute under Section 10(1)(d)
of the I.D.Act.,1947.
REFERENCE No. 72 OF 2007
PARTIES : Sri Gautam Kumar & others
At: Kerktha, PO: Gomoh,
Distt: Dhanbad (Jharkhand)
Vs.
The D.E.E.,
Electric Loco Shed Gomoh,
E.C. Railway, Gomoh,
Dhanbad.
Ministry’s Order No. L-41012/1/2006-IR(B-I) dt.11.12.2007
APPEARANCES :
On behalf of the workman/Union : Mr. Sumiran Pal
Ld. Advocate
On behalf of the Management
: Mr. M. M. Khan,
Ld. Advocate
State : Jharkhand
Industry : Railways
Dated, Dhanbad, the 11th July, 2014
AWARD
The Government of India, Ministry of Labour, in
exercise of the powers conferred on them under
Sec.10(1)(d) of the I.D. Act.,1947 has referred the following
dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication vide their Order
No.L-41012/1/2006-IR (B-I) dt.11.12.2007.
SCHEDULE
“Whether the engagement of the 24 workers by the
Management for maintenance of Locos in, Electric
Loco Shed Gomoh, Eastern Central Railway, through
contractor for 5 years, which is permanent nature
job, their termination, and not providing employment
is justified and fair? If not, so what relief
Management can provide to them.
On receipt of the Order No. L-41012/1/2006-IR (B-I)
dt.11.12.2007 of the above mentioned reference from the
Government of India, Ministry of Labour & Employment,
New Delhi for adjudication of the dispute, the Reference
Case No.72-2007 of was registered on 6.12.2008 and
accordingly an order to that effect was passed to issue
notices through the Registered Posts to the parties
concerned, directing them to appear in the Court on the
date fixed, and to file their written statements along with
the relevant documents. In pursuance of the said order,
notices by the Registered Posts were sent to the parties
concerned.
Both the parties made their appearances and filed
their pleadings and photocopies of their documents. The
Union and the O.P./Management through their
Representatives/Advocate, and contested the case,
respectively.
2.
Irrespective of repetitions and noted rulings, the
case of workmen Gautam Kumar & 23 others as stated in
their written statement is that they had been continuously
performing the work of repair and maintenance, the job pf
permanent nature in the twenty two Electric Locos
imported form Switzerland in the Loco Shed, Gomoh under
the E.C. Rly. under the supervision control of the Rly.
Officers from 1996 to Oct./Dec. 2002, after undergoing the
special training from ABB Locos. Though their
engagement was in a prohibited category of repair and
maintenance job under the Contract Labour (Regulation
and Abolition) Act, they were issued their Identity Cards
by the Loco Shed Officers, namely the Sr.Section Engineer,
and over controller of Sr. D.E.E. of the Entire work. for the
said jobs for about six years. They have their own year of
joining activity undergone and educational qualifications
referred respectively against their names of the Annexure-A.
The work was within the electric Loco Shed under the E.C.
Rly. under a project of the Indian Rly. named “TR GP-140
Locomotive Project. During the warranty period of 5 years,
the Swedish Experts were also looking after maintenance
of the Locos, theirafter to enable the Indian Rly. E.C. Rly.
Staffs to continue their maintenance, the workmen were
selected through an agency M/s. Prakash Contractors Pvt.
Ltd., and were deputed/engaged to work in the electric
Loco Shed under the E.C. Rly., Gomoh.All the workmen’s
performance of the job was satisfactory to all the
concerned. The job done by them was perennial and
permanent nature. They were assured of their absorption
and regularization. The Rly. Administration was the
recipient of the benefits of their services for a considerable
period, and they are legally the employees of the E.C. Rly.,
as they get the benefit of EPF Scheme 1952.In this case
the principal employer is the Rly. as real one but not the
immediate contractor. But without any chagesheet or any
department enquiry, some workmen in Oct., 2002 and some
ones in Dec., 2002 were terminated unreasonly.Taking the
same job through other Rly. Employees are depriving the
workmen of their regularization in the job. Various corrupt
and illegal practices of taking the work through outsiders
in connivance with the Rly.Authorities concerned are
prevailing in the Loco Shed whereas it needs the trained
persons like the workmen.
Further alleged by the workmen is that twenty two
locos were the property of the Indian Railway, it had the
primary responsibility and duty to maintain them. Some
Engineers only during the five years’ warranty period were
deputed by the Company at their cost for their maintenance
work. The maintenance and repair of the 22 Locos is a job
6248
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
of permanent and continuous nature for which the services
of the workmen are inevitably required. The Railway
Officers/Supervisors are legally responsible for their
dereliction in the maintenance of the said imported Locos,
if they have not supervised and controlled it. Obviously
the working of the workmen for about six years beyond
the warranty period clearly establishes a legal relationship
between the persons employed to work in an Industry
and the owner of it, irrespective of the relationship created
by the act of the principal/Master or by that of his
authorized agent. Even when a worker is hired in or in
respect of the work of an establishment by a contractor
for his undertaking to produce a result or for supplies of
workmen for any work of the establishment, the factor of
the contractor may be a contract of warranty, is a mere
comouflage.The workmen are trained and experienced in
the work of the Locos, they have no possibility of their
any employment anywhere other than the Railways. The
satisfaction of the Railway Officers with the repair and
maintenance is the prime, but no value of the ABB
Company’s certification. As the Administration control of
Safety and Security of the running of the Locos dependent
on their repair and maintenance surely belongs to the
Railway Admn.The Sr.D.E.E., E.C.Rly, Gomoh, used to send
the workmen to different places: Chittaranjan, Ghaziabad
for repair and maintenance of the Locos. The workmen
were never made aware of the terms and conditions between
the Railway Admn. and the ABB Company, but the Rly.
Admn. Is the main beneficiary of their aforesaid services
in the maintenance of the Locos directly under all the
control of the Railway, their right to their absorption in it
cannot be denied under the camouflage of the contractor.
Likewise the existence of other trained Supervisor and
Staffs under the Rly. Admn. for the maintenance of the
Locos can not deprive the workmen of their accrued right
to their regularization and absorption.
3.
The workmen in their rejoinder have categorically
denied all the allegations of the O.P./Management as
vague, further stating that at appearance of the 24 workmen
with their certificates of trade and qualification in the
interview taken by Sri Jitendra Jha,the then Sr. Divisional
Electrical Engineer,TS Gomoh Electric Loco Shed, they were
selected. At purchase of the ABB Locos by the Indian
Railway through Rly.Board from Switzerland under the
terms and conditions of 5 years warranty, Sr. D.E.E.,
Jitendra Ojha, Elct. Engineer U.S.Ojha and Asst. Engineer
Ghosh were trained in Switzerland for the maintenance of
ABB Locos, and the Engineers had also came from the
ABB, they jointly trained the workmen who began to work
in the Gomoh Electric Loco Shed under the supervision of
the Railway Supervision satisfactory to the Rly. Engineers.
There was neither name nor role of any contractor/Agent
in that regard performance of the workmen’s escorting
duty with the highly sophisticated Locos of 3 phase A.C.
from Gomoh to Delhi or from Gomoh to Howrah was an
inevitable test to the adaptability of the sophisticated ABB
Locos of pressure locomotive engines on the Indian
Railway Tracks in the Indian Climatic conditions. They
worked under all Sr.D.E.E. Jitendra Jha ,Bhardwaj and
K.N.Singh.The nature of the job warrants no employment
through a contractor. They were paid their salary for their
continued service for 7 years from 1996 to 2003. They
were recruited as Rly employees but not properly. The
gradual picking up of the job by same new hand as existing
staff of the Rly. following termination of the qualified
trained persons can not deprive the latter workmen of their
claim for regularization/absorption.
4.
Whereas the contra pled case of the O.P./
Management with categorical denials is that the Railway
purchased the Locos from Switzerland for their won use in
the Train Services for benefit. The Loco shed already
furnished with the staff of different category is for the
purposes of the Loco maintenance. Some officers and
Supervisors were given training for it in Switzerland. Thus,
they picked up the maintenance of the ABB Locos in due
course. The Engineers arrived from Switzerland were
utilizing the persons engaged by the Agent of ABB
company under a contract. All the workers performed their
duty under the guidance of the ABB Company within the
warranty period. It did not come under the purview of the
Control Labour Regulation, as the 24 persons engaged by
the ABB Company were neither recruited nor discontinued
from the services. In the case, the Principal Employer was
the ABB Company, not the Rly.The training of the persons
under the ABB Company was neither scheduled nor
approved by the Railway, so the question of their
educational qualification etc or of a project was
superfluous and unconcerned with the Rly. Authority.
Consequent upon the purchase of 24 ABB Locomotives
from the Company concerned of Switzerland, the Officers
and the Supervisors were trained in Switzerland for their
maintenance, and within the five years period of their
warranty, the existing employees of maintenance in the
Electric Loco Shed, Gomoh, got experience in it, and began
to carry out their maintenance smoothly, following the
termination of the warranty period since thereafter, no
adverse situation arose any time in maintenance of the
ABB locomotives. Since the costly materials are kept
outside, the Identity Card was given by the ABB Company
Representative which was countersigned by the Rly.
Authority to prevent trerpassers. So the Identify Cards
were issued for safety for Railway properties. On any
complain within the warranty period, the Engineers used
to come from Switzerland, and rectified the defeats. The
said persons were under the control of the ABB Company,
the question of assessing their performance was beyond
the Railway Authority, as the Engineers were contarcted.
5.
Further alleged by the O.P./Management that the
alleged termination of these persons engaged by the ABB
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6249
Company followed the expiry of the five years’ warranty
period. The Electric Loco shed, Gomoh, has already the
staff employed in different categories for the maintenance
work. The ABB Company had responsibility for the
maintenance of the said Locos for five years as per the
terms of the agreement under its warranty, for which expert
Engineers engaged from Switzerland were recruited by the
Agent. The payment of salary to the persons, their
attendances and distribution of jobs were done by the
Engineers of the said Company. The EPF was recovered
by the Compay.Thus the Railway Authorities had neither
any part to play nor any involvement anywhere. The
services of these persons were taken by the said Company,
but not by the Railway, for fulfillment of their agreement
for their maintenance job within its warranty period. The
Railway Officers or the Supervisors of the Electric Loco
Shed had nothing in the supervision responsibility of the
Engineers of the Company over the persons engaged by
the Company’s Agent. There is no question of a
camouflage or of any relationship of these persons with
the Railway Authority. The Electric Loco Shed is mainly
for repair and running maintenance of Electric Locomotives
of different classes. The shed has been functioning since
much earlier prior to the arrival of the ABB Locomotives,
smoothly and efficiently carrying out it through the existing
staff of it who are now maintaining the said ABB
Locomotives accordingly. The engagement of these
persons by the said Company for the warranty period of
five years is not a job of prohibiting category. On the
requisition of the Engineers of the said Company for
sending the persons at different places; Chittarajan,
Ghaziabad etc, their identify was only countersigned, but
no journey-pass was issued by the Railway to any of them.
The running maintenance duly certified by the Expert
Engineers was enough to the Railway Authorities, and
accordingly, the said Locos were utilized to work on their
line. These persons had full knowledge of their
engagement at the relevant time for the period of five years
Warranty. There was not any representation by these
persons to the Rly.Auhorities during or after the expiry of
the said warranty. It is well known fact even to the persons
that naturally trained Supervisors/Officers are employed
in the Elect. Loco Shed, Gomoh, mainly for maintenance,
overhauling and periodic inspection of the Elect Locos,
for which maintenance staff are regularly performing their
duties in their maintenance of different categories.
FINDING WITH REASONS
6.
In the instant reference,WWI Gautam Kumar and
WW2 Md.Manir Ahamad,two of the workers on their
affidavited chiefs on their behalf, and MWI Maikal
Lakra,the Sr.Section Engineer, Electric Loco Shed,Gomoh
for the O.P./Management have been examined
respectively.
On careful perusal of the pleadings of both parties,
documents relied and the evidence as adduced on behalf
of the both parties, it prima facie appears the indisputable
fact that the 22 Electric Locos were purchased by the
Railway from the ABB Company Switzerland as per
Warranty period of five years since 1996.
At variance with other facts, the vital issues are
required to be determined for proper adjudication.
Firstly (i) whether there was expressly or impliedly
any employer-employees relationship between both the
parties.
At the point, Mr.Sumren Pal, Learned Advocate for
the workmen has submitted that in view of prima facie
admitted facts- the regularly working of the workmen in
repair of the Locos for beyond five years for the benefits
of the Loco Gomoh of the Railway and their engagement
in the work of perennial nature, the workmen stand entitled
to regularization in their work. In support of it,Mr.Pal has
further argued that in regard to absorption of Contract
Labour by a Public Undertaking on permanent Regular
basis, the employees so appointed on permanent basis
shall be entitled to get from the dates of their absorption
and other benefits as the regular appointed Railway Parcel
Parties already getting as held in the case of A.I.Railway
Parcel & Goods Porters Union Vs. U.O.I. reported in 106
(2003)Delhi Law Times 604 (SC) para 24 to 23.The ruling
relates to ‘Abolition of Contract System of Labour : Report
of Assistant Labour Commissioner can not be taken as
full and complete as to whether petitioner were working
continuously and whether job they perform is perennial
nature; Petitioners in order to succeed have to substantiate
their claim; non-production of evidence in opposition will
not support claim of petitioners.
Further Mr. Pal submits that employer’s obligation
of maintaining a canteen, an establishment of the Principal
Employer availed the service of a contractor, the Hon’ble
Apex Court has been pleased to hold in the case of Mishra
Dhatu Nigam Ltd. Vs. M.Venataiah, reported in 2003 SCC
(L & S) 1066 (DB) that contract Labours would indeed be
the employees of the Principal Employer, and that such
cases do not relate to or depend upon abolition of contract
Labour.
Having relied upon the case of Hussainbhai Vs.The
Alath Factory Tezhilali Union reported in 1978 LAB
I.C.1264 = AIR 1978 SC 1410, Mr. Pal has emphatically
submitted, as held therein, that ‘Where a worker or group
of workers labours to produce goods or services and these
goods or services are for the business of another, that
other is,in fact, the employer. He had economic control
over the workers’substance, skill and continued
employment. If he, for any reason, chokes off, the worker
is virtually laid off. The presence of intermediate
contractors with whom above the workers have immediate
or direct relationship ex-contractors of no consequence
when on lifting the veil or looking at the conspectus of
factors governing employment, lt is found, though draped
on different prefect paper arrangement that the real
employer is the Management, not the immediate contractor
6250
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(Paras 5 to 7). Similarly, referring to the case of Indian
Petrochemicals Corp. Ltd., Vs. Shramik Sena reported in
1999 LAB I.C. 3078 (SC) A, Mr. Pal has to submit in relation
Sections 2(1) and 46 of Factories Act (63 of 1948) as held
therein, that workmen working in the statutory canteen
were even if employed through contractor are employees
of management for purposes of act only.Lastly,the
emphatic plea of Mr.Pal,Learned Counsel for the workmen
is that where a workman is hired in or in connection with
the work of an establishment by the Principal Employer
through a contractor, he acts as an agent so there will be a
master and servant relationship between the Principal
employer and the workman as held in the leading case of
Steel Authority of India Ltd.Vs. V.N.U. Water Front Workers
reported in 2001 LAB I.C. 3656 (SC)(CB) Para 70 at page
3682.Mr. Pal is of view that in lack of proof or production
of any alleged five years’ warranty on behalf of the
Management, the workmen stand entitled to absorption
and regularization in their respective jobs in the terms of
the reference.
Whereas M.M. Khan, the Learned Advocate for the
O.P./Management has vociferously contended that these
24 workmen are not the employees of the Loco Shed,
Gomoh, the E.C.Railway, rather they were engaged by the
Company ABB of Switzerland under warranty for five
years, after the expiry of it, the said company did not
engage them; though they were under their Identity Cards
by the Management, only for their entry into the Loco
Shed,Gomoh for limited years during the five years
warranty; since these 24 workers were never engaged by
the O.P./Management, they neither were nor are the
employees of the Railways so in such situation, no
question of their alleged termination arises, as there was
no employer-employee relationship between the Railway
and the workers.
7.
On perusal of the materials, oral and documentary
of the workmen, and of the O.P./Management, I find the
facts as under:
Only six Identity Cards (all dtt. 25.7 -year ineligible)
of Messrs.Sujay Kumar Dutta,Seva Chand Mahato,Gautam
Kumar,Dhaneshwar Kumar Mahato, Bapi Das, Rajesh Pd,
(Extt.W 1 series), and the photocopy of the I.D. of Mr. Dev
Narayan Paswan (Marked X for identification) clearly
corroborate their status not as the employees of the
Railway, rather they were candidates for the post of
Bombardier Transportation (Ltd.) against RRS/GMO on
terms of “For self Identification valid up to June,2003,and
on sponsorship of the aforesaid Transport Ltd. the
I.D,.Cards appear to be issued under the signatures of
Sr.Section Engineer Rasid Khan.
Six Spl. Day Permits dtt.7.12.1999, 6.12.1999,
24.10.2003, 5.02.2002, 20.11.1999 & 23.10.2003 (Extt. W.2
series) issued by Shri Bose, C.E.E., Chitranjan Loco Motive
to Messers, D.Mahato, S.Dutta, S.Ram, P.Sengupta, Sunjuy
Dutta,S.Dutta.B.Das & S.Ram of M/s. AD TRANZ, BTIL
& Bombardier concerned respectively for one and two
days respectively for entry only.
Three Certifying letters dtt. 25.1.2002, 1.3.2002 &
14.02.2002 (Extt.3 series) issued by S.E.E. C.L.W.Chitranjan
to Messrs Sujay Dutta, Sujay Kr. Dutta and Mr. Bapi Das
as the employees of aforesaid M/s. Bombardier
Transportation India Ltd., Gomoh, for carrying a few
specified tools of Railway to Machinocraft, Post: Makesh,
Distt : Hooghly, Kolkata and M/s. Chittarangan,
Locomotives Works, Chittarangaj respectively. These
Certificates prove the status of aforesaid three workers
only as carrier workers of said Bombarier Transportation
India Ltd.
The Seven Bank Account Pass Books of Sujay Kr.
Dutta twice, Daneshwar Kr. Mahato, thrice, Md. Manir
Ahmad, Rajesh Kumar and Seva Chand Mahato
respectively are their own Pass Books of Allahabad Bank,
Gomoh, marked as Extt.4 series with objection.
The Provident Fund Slips of only two workers Seva
Chandra Mahato and Sujay Jr.Dutta issued by the
P.F.Commissioner, Haryana- Extt.W5 and 6 series
respectively, prove their EPF deductions were done by
their M/s. Prakash Contractors who had issued the
Experience Certificates all dtt.31.10.2002 to only five
workers Dhaneshwar Kr. Mahato, Rajesh Pd, Dev Narayan
Paswan,Seva Chand Mahato and Bapi Das under IR GP-
GP-140 Locomotive Project (Extt. W.7 Series).It is an
acknowledged fact that any Project is not of perennial,
but for time limit just the warranty period in connection
with the purchase of the 22 Electric Locos by the Rly./
Board concerned in the case.
All the aforesaid documents of the workmen
incontroversially set up that they were out and out outside
workers for their M/s. Bombardier or M/s. Prakash
Contractors.But they have though not any such pleading,
yet produced their aforesaid unpleaded evidences which
stand quite inadmissible in the eye of Law.Hence,it stands
evident that there was never any relationship of employer-
employee between both the paties.In such situations the
argument of Mr.Pal appears to be based on false
reasonings, as none of the said rulings holds good with
the facts of the case under adjudication.
(ii)
Whether these workers are entitled to any relief of
employment or regularization.
It stands essential to respond that where no
employer-employee relationship existed between both the
parties for a moment, there can never be any engagement
of the workers by the management as meant by them in
the schedule to the reference. Likewise in lack of their any
engagement, there can never be any termination of any of
the workers by the Railway.
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6251
In result, it is, in the terms of the reference, hereby
awarded that in view of the aforesaid findings, there was
neither engagement of the 24 workers by the Management
for maintenance of Locos in Electric Loco Shed, Gomoh,
Eastern Central Railway, through any contractor for five
years nor their any termination nor there was any occasion
for the management to deny their employment, because
the tricky schedule to the reference itself is quite illegal
and unjustified.Therefore,no Management can provide
any relief to them, as their allegations to that effect are
totally conceived and baseless.
KISHORI RAM, Presiding Officer
List of the workmen
Sl. No.
Name
1.
Gautam Kumar
2.
Suman Banik
3.
S.M.Saquib
4.
Puran Singh Satwal
5.
Sujay Kumar Dutta
6.
Bapi Das
7.
Sujeet Kumar Yadav
8.
Dhaneswar Kr,.Mahato
9.
Imtiyaz Ahamed
10.
Rajesh Kumar Mahato
11.
Deepak Sarkar
12.
Rajesh Prasad
13.
Seva Chand Mahato
14.
Dev Narayan Paswan
15.
Binod Kumar Pandey
16.
A.H.A. Ansari
17.
Biman Kumar Bhowmick
18.
Sudama Ram
19.
Manoj Kumar
20.
Md.Manir Ahmed
21.
Sauman Kr.Moullik
22.
Rakesh Ram
23.
Sanjay Kumar
24.
Madan Kumar Ram
ubZ fnYyh] 8 flrEcj] 2014
dk-vk- 2465-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947
dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj Hkkjrh; LVsV
cSad ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp
vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd
vfèkdj.k psUubZ ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 25@2013) dks izdkf'kr
djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 8@9@2014 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&12012@108@2012&vkbZvkj (ch&I)º
lqefr ldykuh] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh
New Delhi, the 8th September, 2014
S.O. 2465.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. 25/2013) of
the Cent.Govt.Indus.Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Chennai
as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute
between the management of M/s. Lakshmi Vilas Bank
Ltd. and their workmen, received by the Central
Government on 08/09/2014.
[No. L-12012/08/2012-IR (B-I)]
SUMATI SAKLANI, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT
CHENNAI
Wednesday, the 20th August, 2014
Present : K. P. PRASANNA KUMARI, Presiding Officer
Industrial Dispute No. 25/2013
(In the matter of the dispute for adjudication under clause
(d) of sub-section (1) and sub-section 2(A) of Section 10
of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947(14 of 1947), between
the Management of Lakshmi Vilas Bank and their workman)
BETWEEN
Sri J. Vijayasekhar
: 1st Party/Petitioner
AND
M/s. Lakshmi Vilas Bank Ltd. : 2nd Party/Respondent
Administrative Office
Karur-639006
Appearance:
For the 1st Party/Petitioner
: M/s. J. Muthukumaran,
Advocate
For the 2nd Party/Respondent : M/s. T.S. Gopalan & Co.,
Advocates
AWARD
The Central Government, Ministry of Labour &
Employment vide its Order No. L-12012/108/2012-IR(B-I)
dated 21.02.2013 referred the following Industrial Dispute
to this Tribunal for adjudication.
The schedule mentioned in that order is :
“Whether the action of the management of Lakshmi
Vilas Bank Ltd. imposing termination of service on
Sri J. Vijayasekhar is justified or not? If not to what
relief the workman is entitled to?”
2.
On receipt of the Industrial Dispute this Tribunal
has numbered it as ID 25/2013 and issued notices to both
sides. Both sides have entered appearance through their
counsel and filed their claim and counter statement
respectively.
6252
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
3.
The averments in the Claim Statement filed by the
petitioner in brief are these:
The petitioner was appointed as Sub-Staff in
Respondent Bank on 25.02.1991. In 2005 the petitioner
was promoted as Clerk. While the petitioner was serving
at Rajahmundry Branch, the Respondent issued a Charge
Memo to him alleging that the provisional certificate and
mark-list submitted by the petitioner are fake and this was
done with the intension to cheat the bank and thereby the
petitioner had committed gross-misconduct under Clause-
5M of the Bipartite Settlement. The petitioner has
submitted explanation to the Charge Memo. The
Respondent ordered enquiry and appointed Enquiry
Officer. The Enquiry Officer submitted his report that the
charge against the petitioner is proved. After hearing the
petitioner, the respondent imposed the punishment of
discharge from service with superannuation benefits on
the petitioner. The charge framed against the petitioner is
baseless. The Respondent has not proved that the
certificate and the mark-list submitted by the petitioner
are bogus. An award may be passed holding that the action
of the management in terminating the service of the
petitioner is unjustified and also directing the Respondent
to reinstate the petitioner with full back wages, continuity
of service and other attendant benefits.
4.
The Respondent has filed Counter Statement
contending as follows:
In the year 2002, on the basis of representation of
Sub-Staff who have acquired the degree of graduation,
the Respondent Bank had introduced two channels of
promotion from Sub-Staff to Clerk, one general channel of
seniority-cum-merit and the other graduates automatic
eligibility for promotion. Sometime in the year 2002, the
bank received information that some of the Sub-Staff who
were promoted as Clerks had produced false degree
certificates. On seeking confirmation from the concerned
universities it came to light that in a few cases Sub-Staff
had secured promotion by producing false degree
certificates. The petitioner was one such candidate who
had produced false certificate for getting promotion from
Sub-Staff to Clerical Staff. The petitioner had reported on
17.09.2005 that he had completed BA Degree Examination
from Andhra University and had produced provisional
certificate alongwith statement of marks for having
undergone the Graduation course and obtained the Degree
Certificate. On verification with the School of Distance
Education, Andhra University, the Assistant Registrar sent
reply stating that Provisional Certificate and Mark-lists
produced by the petitioner are fake. On the basis of this
charge sheet was issued to the petitioner charging him
with the misconduct of production of false certificate for
getting promotion. As the explanation given by the
petitioner was not convincing, an enquiry was conducted
and the Enquiry Officer had submitted report holding that
charge against the petitioner was proved. After personal
hearing of the petitioner, the Disciplinary Authority
awarded the punishment. The petitioner has committed
very serious misconduct by which he has forfeited the
confidence of the bank. The punishment awarded to the
petitioner cannot be said to be harsh. The petitioner is not
entitled to any relief.
5.
The evidence in the case consists of oral evidence
of WW1 and MW1 and documents marked as Ext. W1 to
Ext. W16 on the petitioner’s side and Ext.M1 to Ext. M32
on the Respondent’s side.
6.
The points for consideration are:
(i)
Whether the action of the management in imposing
the punishment of termination from service on the
petitioner is legal and justified?
(ii)
What is the relief, if any, to which the petitioner is
entitled?
The Points
7.
The petitioner had allegedly produced bogus
provisional degree certificate and mark-list for obtaining
promotion from the post of Sub-Staff to that of Clerk at the
Respondent Bank. As per the Bipartite Settlement, Sub-
Staff who had acquired Degree were entitled to automatic
promotion as Clerk. The petitioner is said to have submitted
provisional certificate and mark-list to the Respondent on
the basis of which he was given promotion. In view of
certain anonymous letters received at the Bank informing
that some of the Sub-Staff who were promoted had
produced bogus certificates, the Bank had written to the
concerned Universities including the University of Andhra
Pradesh from where the petitioner had allegedly obtained
the Degree. The Assistant Registrar of the University is
said to have written to the Respondent informing that the
Provisional Certificate and the Certificates produced by
the petitioner are fake. It was on the basis of this
departmental enquiry was initiated against the petitioner
in which he was found guilty and was removed from service
with superannuation benefits.
8.
Except for the contention that the Respondent did
not prove the charges against the petitioner as per law,
there is no case for the petitioner that the domestic enquiry
conducted by the Respondent is not in a fair and proper
manner. In spite of this, the petitioner has adduced
evidence before this Court to prove certain documents.
One witness has been examined on the side of the
Respondent also.
9.
In the domestic enquiry, the Management has
examined three witnesses. The provisional certificates and
three mark-lists submitted by the petitioner to the Bank
were marked in the enquiry proceedings. The witnesses
examined are all bank officials. The witnesses examined
before this Tribunal by the Respondent also is an official
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6253
of the bank, the one who was working as Branch Manager
at Rajahmundry where the petitioner had worked. He has
stated that all the correspondence between the petitioner
and the Bank were done through him. This witness is a
witness to the enquiry proceedings also.
10.
The Enquiry Officer had relied upon the letter said
to have been written by the University informing that the
provisional certificate and the mark-lists sent to it as issued
to the petitioner are bogus. The argument that has been
advanced on behalf of the Counsel for the Petitioner is
that the Management having advanced the case that the
documents produced by the petitioner are bogus, it was
for the Management to prove that the certificate and the
mark-list are bogus. According to the counsel in the
absence of evidence of concerned persons from the
University there is no proof available to show that the
documents are bogus. Thus according to him, the Enquiry
Officer has entered a finding against the petitioner in the
absence of any evidence.
11.
The counsel for the Respondent has referred to the
documents produced and the various communications
from the University to show that actually the petitioner
had not obtained a Degree from the University but he had
produced bogus documents to obtain promotion. Ex.M3
is the Provisional Certificate and Ext.M4 to Ext.M6 are the
mark lists produced by the petitioner before the
Respondent. Ext.M7 is the letter written by the Bank to
the Controller of Examinations of Andhra University
requesting to confirm having issued the Ext.M3 Certificate
and Ext.M4 to Ext.M6, the mark-lists. Ex.M14 is the reply
submitted by the Assistant Registrar of School of Distance
Education, Andhra Pradesh informing that the provisional
certificate and the mark-lists issued to the petitioner were
verified and were found not genuine and fake. There is
another such letter from Assistant Registrar for
Examinations and marked as Ext.M15 also. It seems the
Respondent has made efforts to get the Officers of the
University who sent Ext.M14 and Ext.M15 but they were
not available and were not examined in the enquiry
proceedings.
12.
It was on the basis of non-examination of above
witnesses it has been contended by the counsel for the
petitioner that there is no proof available to show that the
documents are not genuine. According to him, on the basis
of letters said to have been written by the authorities of
the University, without examining them, the Enquiry
Officer should not have entered a finding that the
documents are not genuine.
13.
The Counsel for the Respondent has referred to the
explanation submitted by the petitioner and marked as
Ext.W3. In this explanation the petitioner has taken a stand
that he has taken coaching and guidance from a local
educational institute and has appeared for BA Degree
examination. According to him, the Administrator of the
local institute had managed to procure fake certificates
and had given them to him. Believing them on the face
and also due to the fact that he has appeared for BA
Examinations, he has forwarded the certificates to the
Respondent. He has requested the Respondent not to act
on the certificates and to pardon him. He has further stated
that he is withdrawing his letter dated 17.09.2005 (Ext.M2)
seeking promotion along with its enclosures.
14.
No doubt the Respondent should have examined
the concerned authorities of School of Distance Education,
University of Andhra Pradesh to prove that the documents
submitted by the petitioner are fake. However, the very
admission made by the petitioner in Ext.W3 would show
that the documents are fake. He had stated in his
explanation that the Administrator “appeared to have
managed to procured fake certificates”. From the wording
in the explanation it is very clear that the petitioner has
accepted the fact that the documents are fake. It is for this
reason, he has requested to withdraw his letter seeking
promotion along with its enclosures i.e. the certificate and
the mark-lists.
15.
Ex.W8 is the appeal submitted to the Appellate
Authority. In this also the petitioner has stated that he
has received the provisional certificates and mark sheet
through courier and the cover appeared to have been
posted at Visakhapatnam which is the Headquarters of
the University and he had no knowledge that they are not
genuine. He has further stated that only from the Charge
Sheet issued to him he came to know of the fact. He has
further stated that he had enquired with the Administrator
of the Tutorial College where he took the coaching and
came to know that the Administrator had stage managed
the fake certificates and withheld his original mark sheets
where he had failed in two subjects. He had also stated
that when he came to know about the truth of the certificate
he withdrew his letter seeking promotion and sought
unconditional apology from the Bank. Thus there is the
admission by the petitioner during the enquiry
proceedings and during the proceedings in appeal that
the certificates and the mark list are fake, though he had
contended that at the time when he presented them to the
Respondent he had no knowledge that they are fake. In
the wake of these admissions on behalf of the petitioner I
do not think the failure of the Respondent to examine the
authorities concerned to prove the genuineness or not of
the documents are of any consequence. The very
admission of the petitioner would show that the
documents are fake.
16.
An employee working as Sub-Staff is entitled to
automatic promotion as per the Bipartite Settlement only
if he has obtained a degree. The petitioner having failed to
acquire the necessary qualification, he cannot work in the
Clerical Cadre with the Respondent.
6254
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
17.
The petitioner was discharged from service with
superannuation benefits for the misconduct of producing
false certificates for obtaining promotion. The argument
that is advanced on behalf of the petitioner is that he has
not submitted the certificate and the mark-list before the
Respondent with the knowledge that they are fake.
According to the petitioner, he never knew before he
received the Charge Memo that the documents are fake.
Even in the explanation submitted by him to the Charge
Memo he has stated that he has taken private coaching,
that the documents were sent to him through courier from
Visakhapatnam and he had no reason to doubt that they
are fake certificates. He had stated in his appeal memo
submitted to Appellate Authority that on enquiry he had
come to know that a criminal proceedings has been initiated
against the Administrator of the coaching centre where he
had attended.
18.
The counsel for the petitioner had referred to certain
legal pronouncements in support of his argument that in
the absence of proof of tampering with the document the
person need not be visited with the punishment of
discharge from service. The counsel has referred to the
decision in NAVDEEP VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND
ANOTHER reported in 2006 9 SCC 500 where it was held
that even though there was tampering, the tampering itself
was not of any consequence. It was observed that even
without considering the tampered marks the appellant
possessed minimum educational qualification. The Apex
Court had directed that the government could well to
consider whether a fresh appointment could be given
ignoring the tampered marks. Of course, it was specified
by the Apex Court that this is not to be taken as a precedent.
In the decision in SEKAR VS. DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL
EDUCATION AND OTHERS reported in 2009 4 CTC 158 it
was held that the alleged bogus certificate has no bearing
in the case and had directed to reinstate the petitioner in
service. In the decision in GUNASEKARAN VS.
DIRECTOR OF ANIMAL HUSBANDRY AND ANOTHER
reported in Writ Petition No. 14217 of 2007 (unreported)
the Madras High Court has found that the certificate is
bogus. At the same time it was also found that the petitioner
had no knowledge that the certificate itself is a bogus one.
It was held that in the absence of knowledge on the part of
the person who produced the certificate that the same
was fake he cannot be penalized with the punishment of
dismissal. The counsel for the Respondent has referred to
the decision in KERALA SOLVENT EXTRACTIONS LTD.
VS. UNNIKRISHNAN AND ANOTHER reported in 1994
2 LLJ 888 where a workman had suppressed his higher
qualification since the qualification for the post was only
8th Standard and the Apex Court has upheld the
termination of the person on the basis. However, it is not
a case where the concerned person has acted without
knowledge.
19.
Certain circumstances in the present case persuade
me to hold that there is every possibility of the petitioner
having acted without actual knowledge of the fakeness of
the certificate. Immediately after the charge memo was
issued to him he has given an explanation stating that he
did not consciously, knowingly and intentionally produced
any fake certificates before the Respondent. He has stated
that he had received the documents by post and he was
under the impression that they are genuine and thus have
produced them before the Respondent seeking promotion
on that basis. In the same explanation he has stated that
he has taken coaching from a private coaching centre and
he had no knowledge that the documents were fake. The
possibility of a coaching centre creating the certificates to
boost its image certainly could not be ruled out. Another
aspect which persuades me to think that the petitioner
had no part in the affair is that he had always taken a
consistent stand that he was not aware of the manipulation
and he was just made a scapegoat.
20.
The petitioner seems to have been working with the
Respondent for some time. There is no case for the
Respondent that the petitioner had committed any
misconduct earlier. He, just like any person working as a
Class-IV employee, had the dream of getting into the next
higher step in the ladder, had attended the coaching class
and had appeared for all the examinations. When he
received the certificates in his hand, in all probability he
might have thought that he had passed the examination
and the certificate and the mark-list are proof of this. I am
inclined to come to the conclusion that the petitioner in all
probability had no knowledge that the documents are fake.
In fact in the absence of any evidence on the part of the
management there is nothing to show that the petitioner
had submitted the documents intentionally, with the
knowledge that they are fake, in order to gain advantage
using the same. In that case there is no impropriety in
allowing the petitioner to continue as Sub-Staff with the
Respondent.
21.
On the basis of my discussion above, an award is
passed as follows:
The order of the Disciplinary Authority which was
confirmed by the Appellate Authority is modified. The
punishment of discharge from service is set aside. The
Respondent is directed to take back the petitioner in service
as Sub-Staff within two months and retain him in service
in the same position. The petitioner will not be entitled to
any back wages. The period during which he was out of
service shall be taken into account for the purpose of
continuity of service only.
K. P. PRASANNA KUMARI, Presiding Officer
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6255
Witnesses Examined :
For the 1st Party/
: WW1, Sri J. Vijayasekhar
Petitioner
For the 2nd Party/ : MW1, Sri Chinta Bala Nageswara Rao
Management
Documents Marked :
On the petitioner’s side
Ex.No.
Date
Description
Ex.W1
16.02.1991
Appointment Order
Ex.W2
13.04.2006
Charge Sheet
Ex.W3
25.05.2006
Explanation
Ex.W4
12.08.2006
Enquiry Officer Appointment
Ex.W5
12.01.2008
Findings of Enquiry Officer
Ex.W6
02.02.2008
Proceedings of the Disciplinary
Authority
Ex.W7
14.02.2008
Personal hearing of Disciplinary
Authority
Ex.W8
20.02.2008
Appeal submitted by the
petitioner
Ex.W9
07.07.2008
Personal hearing
Ex.W10
26.07.2008
Minutes of personal hearing
Ex.W11
01.08.2008
Punishment confirmed by the
Authority
Ex.W12
-
Annexure
Ex.W13
02.05.2006
Mark Statement
Ex.W14
-
Hall Ticket
Ex.W15
-
Student Identification Card
Ex.W16
-
Hall Ticket
On the Management’s side
Ex. No.
Date
Description
Ex.M1
11.09.2006
05.12.2006
Proceedings of Enquiry
22.01.2007
30.04.2007
Ex.M2
17.09.2005
Letter from petitioner to
Respondent
Ex.M3
30.07.2005
Provisional Certificate issued to
Vijayasekhar Jonnada by Andhra
University – April, 2005
Ex.M4
30.06.2005
Statement of marks issued by
Andhra University to Vijayasekhar
Jonnada – April, 2005
Ex.M5
14.07.2005
Statement of marks issued by
Andhra University to Vijayasekhar
Jonnada – April, 2005
Ex.M6
30.07.2005
Statement of marks issued by
Andhra University to Vijayasekhar
Jonnada – April, 2005
Ex.M7
27.10.2005
Letter from Respondent to
Controller of Examinations,
Andhra University under Ref.
HRD/PAY/9/24/2005-2006
Ex.M8
31.12.2005
Letter
from
Respondent,
Rajahmundry Branch to A.O.,
Karur
Ex.M9
06.03.2006
Letter from Respondent to
Petitioner
Ex.M10
09.03.2006
Reply from petitioner to the
Respondent through Branch
Manager, Rajahkundry Branch
Ex.M11
03.02.2006
Letter from Respondent to the
Controller of Examination, Andhra
University under reference HRD/
SS/268/2005-2006
Ex.M12
08.02.2006
Letter from Andhra University,
Visakhapatnam to Respondent
Ex.M13
15.02.2006
Letter from Respondent to The
Controller of Examination, Andhra
Pradesh, Visakhapatnam
Ex.M14
/2/2006
Letter from Andhra University
received
School of Distance Education,
on
Visakhapatnam to Respondent
03.02.2006
(No. SDE/Exams – II/ 2006)
Ex.M15
06.05.2006
Letter from Andhra University
School of Distance Education,
Visakhapatnam addressed to
Respondent
Ex.M16
09.02.2007
Letter from Respondent to
Lakshmi
Vilas
Bank,
Visakhapatnam
Ex.M17
26.02.2007
Letter from Lakshmi Vilas Bank,
Visakhapatnam to Respondent
Ex.M18
26.02.2007
Letter from Andhra University
School of Distance Education to
Respondent - (No. SDE/Exams –
II/2006)
Ex.M19
29.06.2007
Presenting Officer’s submissions
Ex.M20
24.09.2007
Defense submissions
Ex.M21
14.02.2008
2nd Show-Cause Notice issued
by Respondent to the Petitioner
proposing
punishment
of
“Discharge from service with
superannuation benefits” and
notifying personal hearing on
28.02.2008
6256
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
Ex.M22
14.03.2008
Proceedings of personal hearing
before the Disciplinary Authority
Ex.M23
09.05.2008
Final order discharging the
petitioner from the service of the
Bank with superannuation
benefits
Ex.M24
01.08.2008
Order of the Appellate Authority
confirming the punishment
imposed by the Disciplinary
Authority
Ex.M25
28.11.2011
Dispute raised by Petitioner under
Section-2A of the ID Act before
ALC(C), Chennai
Ex.M26
21.04.2012
Respondent’s counter filed before
the ALC (C), Chennai
Ex.M27
25.10.2012
Conciliation Failure Report
Ex.M28
20.01.2009
Receipt of the petitioner towards
settlement of his gratuity dues –
Rs. 1,13,965.05 credited to his SB
A/c No. 605-301-13349
Ex.M29
20.01.2009
Receipt of the petitioner towards
settlement of his GSIL payment
and credited to his SB A/c No. 605-
301-13349
Ex.M30
15.11.2010
Receipt of the petitioner towards
full and final settlement of his
gratuity arrears – Rs. 26,376.26
credited to his SB A/c No. 605-
301-13349
Ex.M31
20.01.2009
Receipt of the petitioner towards
full and final settlement of his
provident fund dues and credited
to his SB A/c No. 605-301-13349
Ex.M32
26/27.09.2002Settlement
ubZ fnYyh] 8 flrEcj] 2014
dk-vk- 2466-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947
dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj LVsV cSad vkWiQ
chdkusj ,.M t;iqj ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds
deZdkjksa ds chp vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh;
ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k@Je U;k;ky;] t;iqj ds iapkV (lanHkZ
la[;k 15@2011) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks
8@9@2014 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&12011@01@2011&vkbZvkj (ch&I)º
lqefr ldykuh] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh
New Delhi, the 8th September, 2014
S.O. 2466.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 15/2011)
of the Cent. Govt. Indus. Tribunal-cum-Labour
Court, Jaipur as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial
dispute between the management of State Bank of Bikner
& Jaipur and their workmen, received by the Central
Government on 08/09/2014.
[No. L-12011/01/2011-IR (B-I)]
SUMATI SAKLANI, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL
TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT, JAIPUR
Sh. BHARAT PANDEY, Presiding Officer
I.D.15/2011
Reference No. L-12011/01/2011 (IR(B-I) dated: 2.6.2011
General Secretary
All Bank Safai Karamchari Sangh
Sita Bari, Kamani Road,
Harijan Basti, Jhotwara,
Jaipur
V/s.
General Manager (Operations)
State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur
Head Office, Tilak Marg, C-Scheme,
Jaipur
Present
For the applicant Union: Sh. Dindayal Dhehanwal
For the non-applicant
: Sh. R.K.Jain &
Sh. A. Mazoomdar, Advocate
AWARD
30.10.2013
1.
The Central Government in exercise of the powers
conferred under clause (d) of sub-section 1 & 2(A) of
Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act 1947 has referred
the following Industrial dispute to this tribunal for
adjudication:-
“Whether the action of the management of State
Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur in terminating the services
of Shri Sonu, Part Time Sweeper, SBBJ, Surajpole
Branch, Jaipur with effect from 17.2.2010 is legal &
justified? To what relief the workman is entitled?”
2.
After receipt of reference it was registered on
12.2.2011 & notices were sent to both the parties. On
19.9.2011 statement of claim dated 19.9.2011 was filed on
behalf of applicant through General Secretary, All Bank
Safai Karamchari Sangh (Regd.) Sh. Dindayal Dhehanwal.
On behalf of non-applicant, General Manager (Operation),
State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur, Head Office, Jaipur
Sh. Amitabh Mazoomdar, Advocate was in appearance &
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6257
reply against the claim was filed on 11.9.2012. Opportunity
was given to applicant for filing rejoinder & concerned
documents. On 24.1.2013 documents were filed by non-
applicant alongwith index. Opportunity was given to
applicant for filing rejoinder & documents on 15.7.2013
but neither rejoinder nor documents were filed on that
date.
3.
An application alongwith memorandum of settlement
was jointly filed by both the parties with request to keep
the memorandum of settlement on record of the file &
pass the award according to memorandum of settlement
filed by the parties.
4.
According to memorandum of settlement, it has been
agreed by & between the parties that applicant Sh. Sonu
represented through General Secretary of the All Bank
Safai Karamchari Sangh will be absorbed by the bank as
part time safai karamchari (PTSK) w.e.f. 1.8.2013 & there
will be no claim from his side for any kind of benefit accruing
before 1.8.2013 against the bank & all dispute between the
parties shall be deemed to have been resolved. It has also
been resolved between the parties that Sh. Sonu will be
posted in any branch of the bank existing in Jaipur & his
appointment by the bank shall not be considered as an
example for extending this kind of benefit in any other
case. It has also been resolved that dispute between the
parties before industrial tribunal Cum Labour Court, Jaipur
which has been registered as CGIT-15/2011 shall came to
an end & an application will be jointly filed before the
tribunal to pass the award in terms of memorandum of
settlement.
5.
Due to retirement of the Presiding Officer of this
tribunal, this memorandum of settlement remained
undisposed.
6.
After assuming the charge by the succeeding
Presiding Officer on 10.10.2013, another application in
connection with memorandum of settlement was filed by
parties on 25.10.2013 in which it has been alleged that in
memorandum of settlement dated 15.7.2013 in 1st paragraph
1.8.2013 be read as on or before 31.10.2013 which is the
date of taking Sh. Sonu in employment of the bank as part
time safai karamchari. It has also been requested that this
application be made part of the memorandum of settlement.
7.
The dispute between the parties referred for
adjudication pertains to whether termination of the services
of Sh. Sonu, a part time sweeper at State Bank of Bikaner
& Jaipur, Surajpole Branch, Jaipur w.e.f. 17.2.2010 by the
management of SBBJ is legal & justified.
8.
The Ld. Representatives appearing on behalf of
both the parties have jointly submitted that dispute raised
by the applicant union for Sh. Sonu has been amicably
resolved & a settlement has been entered into by both the
parties on 15.7.2013 & 25.10.2013, therefore, award may be
passed in terms of memorandum of settlement. In view of
above facts & circumstances, memorandum of settlement
may be accepted by the tribunal & dispute between the
parties may be disposed in terms of settlement entered
into by them.
9.
In view of above fact & circumstances, I find it fit &
proper to dispose this CGIT case no.15/2011 in terms of
memorandum of settlement which appears to be legal &
voluntarily entered by both the parties.
10.
In view of above, the award is passed in terms of
memorandum of settlement dated 15.7.2013 & 25.10.2013,
Annexure-A & Annexure-B respectively. Both the annexure
will be part of the award.
11.
Award as above.
12.
Let a copy of the award be sent to Central
Government for publication u/s 17(1) of the I.D.Act.
BHARAT PANDEY, Presiding Officer
Annex-A
le{k ekuuh; dsUæh; vkS|ksfxd U;k;kfèkdj.k] t;iqj
okn la[;k % lh-th-vkbZ-Vh- 15@2011
eè;
egklfpo]
vkWy cSad liQkbZ deZpkjh la?k
t;iqj
,oa
'kk[kk izcaèkd]
,l-ch-ch-ts-]
lqjtiksy 'kk[kk] t;iqj A
izkFkhZ o vçkFkhZ dh vksj ls la;qDr izkFkZuk&i=k
ekU;oj]
mijksDr izdj.k esa nksuksa i{k la;qDr :i ls fuEu fuosnu
djrs gSa %µ
1-
;g fd mijksDr izdj.k okLrs tokcmy tokc] izkFkhZ fnukad
25&4&2013 dks fu;r Fkh A
2-
;g fd mijksDr izdj.k esa nksuksa i{k ds eè; ijLij okrkZvksa
ds i'pkr~ ,d vkilh czkgeh le>kSrk lEiUu gqvk gS]
ftldh ,d izfr bl izkFkZuk&i=k ds lkFk layXu dh tk jgh
gS A
vr% ekuuh; U;k;fèkdj.k ls lfou; fuosnu gS fd mDr
izdj.k esa le>kSrk ifji=k dks fjdkMZ ij fy;k tkdj] mDr
le>kSrs ds vuq:i vkokMZ ikfjr djus dh Ñik iQjekosa A
okLrs vizkFkhZ
okLrs izkFkhZ
jktsUnz oqQekj oekZ
nhun;ky <+sguoky
'kk[kk izcUèkd]
egklfpo
,l-ch-ch-ts- lwjtiksy 'kk[kk
vky cSad liQkbZ deZpkjh la?k
t;iqj
jktLFkku] t;iqj
fnukad % 15&7&2013
6258
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
le>kSrs dk çk:i
(iQkeZ&,p)
i{kdkjksa ds uke
% eS- LVsV cSad vkWiQ chdkusj ,.M t;iqj
ekiZQr egk izcaèkd ,oa egk lfpo vkWy
cSad liQkbZ deZpkjh la?k] t;iqj A
izcUèk izfrfufèk
% 1- Jh jktsUnz oqQekj oekZ] 'kk[kk izcUèkd]
,l-ch-ch-ts- lwjt iky 'kk[kk] t;iqj A
deZpkjh la?k izfrfufèk% nhun;ky <s+guoky (egklfpo)
vky cSad liQkbZ deZpkjh la?k jktLFkku A
le>kSrs dk laf{kIr fooj.k
vkWy cSad liQkbZ deZpkjh la?k }kjk Jh lksew ds lEcèk esa
,d dfFkr vkS|ksfxd fookn dsUnzh; mi Je vk;qDr] t;iqj ds
le{k mBk;k x;k Fkk ,oa ftlds vliQy gksus ij dsUnzh; ljdkj
}kjk mDr dfFkr fookn dks U;k;fu.kkZFkZ dsUnzh; vkS|ksfxd U;k;kfèkdj.k
,oa Je U;k;ky;] t;iqj dks izsf"kr dj fn;k x;k gS] tks orZeku esa
izdj.k la[;k lhthvkbZVh 15@2011 ij yfEcr gSA mDr okn ds
yfEcr jgrs gq, i{kdkjksa }kjk vkilh okrkZ ds tfj;s fookn dks
lekIr djus dh igy dh xbZ ,oa ijLij okrkZvksa ds i'pkr~
i{kdkjksa ds eè; fuEu 'krks± ij le>kSrk lEiUu fd;k x;k %µ
le>kSrs dh 'krs± %
1-
;g fd nksuksa i{kksa ds eè; ;g r; ik;k x;k fd lksuw
pkofj;k ftldk izfrfufèkRo mDr la?k }kjk fd;k x;k gS dks
fnukad 01&08&13 ls va'k dkyhu liQkbZ deZpkjh (PTSK)ds
in ij cSad }kjk dk;Z ij j[kk tk;sxk A i{kdkjksa ds eè; ;g
Hkh r; ik;k x;k fd mDr frfFk ls fu;qfDr nsus ds mijkar Jh
lksuw pkaofj;k vFkok mDr deZpkjh la?k }kjk fdlh Hkh izdkj
ds iwoZ vofèk ds ykHk@ifjykHk] osru cdk;k vFkok vU;]
;k ofj"Brk vkfn ds ckjs esa fdlh Hkh izdkj dk dksbZ Dyse
cSad ds fo:¼ 'ks"k ugha jg tk;sxk rFkk lHkh izdkj ds
fookn dks bl le>kSrs ds ifjis{k esa lekIr le>k tk;sxk A
2-
;g fd nksuksa i{kksa ds eè; ;g Hkh r; ik;k x;k fd cSad }kjk
t;iqj esa dgha Hkh fdlh Hkh 'kk[kk esa] Jh lksuw pkoafj;k dks
fu;qDr djus dk vfèkdkj jgsxk ,oa ftlds lEcaèk esa Jh
lksuw pkoafj;k vFkok deZpkjh la?k dks fdlh Hkh izdkj dh
dksbZ vkifÙk ugha gksxh rFkk u gh muds }kjk mDr lEcaèk esa
dksbZ fojksèk fd;k tk;sxk A
3-
;g fd nksuksa i{kksa ds eè; ;g Hkh r; ik;k x;k fd Jh lksuw
pkaofj;k dks mijksDrkuqlkj fu;qfDr nsus dks fdlh Hkh izdkj
ls ckè;dkjh felky@ifjikVh ugha ekuk tkosxk rFkk orZeku
izdj.k ds vykok la?k }kjk vU; fdlh ekeys esa mDr
lan£Hkr fu;qfDr ds fy, dksbZ ncko ugha cuk;k tkosxk A
4-
;g fd nksuksa i{kksa ds eè; ;g Hkh r; ik;k x;k fd bl
le>kSrs ds iQyLo:i deZpkjh la?k }kjk tks vkS|ksfxd
fookn ekuuh; dsUnzh; vkS|ksfxd U;k;fèkdj.k ,oa Je
U;k;ky;] t;iqj ds le{k izLrqr fd;k gS] tks fd ekuuh;
U;k;ky; }kjk izdj.k la[;k lh-th-vkbZ-Vh- 15@2011 ij
iathÑr fd;k x;k] dks iw.kZ :i ls lekIr le>k tkosxk
rFkk i{kdkjksa }kjk la;qDr :i ls ekuuh; U;k;ky; ds le{k
,d la;qDr izkFkZuk i=k izLrqr dj fuosnu fd;k tkosxk fd
ekuuh; U;k;ky; mDr fookn dks lekIr dj i{kdkjksa ds
eè; gq;s orZeku le>kSrs ds vuq:i] vokMZ ikfjr djus dh
Ñik djsa A
mijksDr 'krks± ,oa 'kjk;rksa ds lkFk nksuksa i{kksa ds eè;
vkt 15&07&2013 dks lkSgknz iw.kZ okrkoj.k esa mijksDr
izdkj ls le>kSrk fu"ikfnr gqvk gS] lun jgs ,oa oDr
t:jr dke vkos A
gLrk{kj deZpkjh
gLrk{kj izcUèk
izfrfufèk
izfrfufèk
nhn;ky <+sguoky
jktsUnz oqQekj oekZ
vk-cS-l-d-la?k]
,l-ch-ch-ts- lwjt iky 'kk[kk
jktLFkku] t;iqj
t;iqj
lk{kh %
1- Arvind Mathur Staff SBBJ Surajpole Br. Jaipur
1- 'kadj iq=k daqt fcgkjh] 266]
';keiqjh] ghnk dh eksjh] t;iqj
ANNEX-B
Before : The Hon"ble Presiding Officer CGIT-Cum-
Labour Court, Jaipur
Case No. CGIT 15/11
Sonu (Workman) Rep. by
All Banks Safai Karmchari Sangh (Regd.)
Vs.
Management of State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur
Application for issuance of Award in terms of Settlement
arrived between both the Parties.
MAY IT PLEASE YOUR HONOUR
Both the parties as mentioned above have arrived at
a settlement to resolve the above dispute as per terms and
conditions contained in the memo of settlement dt.
15-7-2013 submitted jointly before the Hon. Tribunal.
However, the date stipulated in the above settlement
dt. 15-7-2013 was 1st August, 2013 for providing
appointment to the workman. We humbly request to your
honour to kindly read the said date as on or before 31st
October, 2013 instead of 1st August, 2013 and this
document be made Humbly sub by part of agreement.
25th October, 2013
Rajinder Kumar Verma
Branch Manager
Din Dayal Dhanwal Genl. Secy. Union
All Bank Safai Karmachari Sangh
(SONU) Workman
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6259
ubZ fnYyh] 8 flrEcj] 2014
dk-vk- 2467-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947
dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj mÙkj iwoZ jsyos
ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp
vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd
vfèkdj.k@Je U;k;ky;] y[kumQ ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 05@2002)
dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 8@9@2014 dks izkIr
gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&41011@40@2001&vkbZvkj (ch&I)º
lqefr ldykuh] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh
New Delhi, the 8th September, 2014
S.O. 2467.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 05/2002)
of the Cent. Govt. Indus. Tribunal-cum-Labour Court,
Lucknow as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial
dispute between the management of North Eastern Rialway
and their workmen, received by the Central Government
on 08/09/2014.
[No. L-41011/40/2001-IR (B-I)]
SUMATI SAKLANI, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL
TRIBUNAL–CUM-LABOUR COURT LUCKNOW
PRESENT : Dr. MANJU NIGAM, Presiding Officer
I.D. No. 05/2002
Ref. No. L-41011/40/2001-IR (B-I) dated : 08.01.2002
BETWEEN
The Branch Secretary
N.E. Railway Employees Union, P.R.K.S.
Gorakhpur, C/o Shakha Mantri
Distt. Gorakhpur - 273001
(Espousing cause of Mo. Sagir & 11 others)
AND
The General Manager
North Eastern Railway
Gorakhpur – 273001
AWARD
1.
By order No. L-41011/40/2001-IR(B-I) dated:
08.01.2002 and its subsequent corrigendum dated
05.12.2002, the Central Government in the Ministry of
Labour, New Delhi in exercise of powers conferred by
clause (d) of sub-section (1) and sub-section (2A) of
Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947)
referred this industrial dispute between The Branch
Secretary, N.E. Railway Employees Union, P.R.K.S.,
Gorakhpur, C/o Shakha Mantri, Distt. Gorakhpur and the
General Manager, North Eastern Railway, Gorakhpur for
adjudication to this CGIT-cum-Labour Court, Lucknow.
2.
The reference under adjudication is:
“Whether The Action of The Management of N.E.
Railway, Gorakhpur in not regularizing the Services
of 12 workmen as per list submitted by The Union
(Enclosed Herewith) as Railway Servant and also
Terminated them from the services w.e.f. 04.07.1990
are legal and justified? If not, what relief the
workmen are entitled?”
3.
The case of the workmen’s union, in brief, is that the
Railway Men’s Consumer Co-operative Society Ltd.
(hereinafter referred to as Society), a registered Society
under NER, Gorakhpur runs with the Co-operation of
Railways. The Society has nine units viz. Accounts
Canteen, CME Canteen, CCS Canteen, Press Canteen
Depot, TAB Canteen, Stores Canteen, Loco Shed Canteen,
Central Stores Canteen and Halwai Khana. The Society
collects the subscription from the employees of the Railway
and deposit a part of same to the Railway and in turn
Railway provides salary and other benefits to the
employees of Society after adding subsidy to the amount.
It is pleaded by the Union that the accounts of the all the
units of the Society were regulated by the Railways and
the orders/directions of Railway Board were applicable
upon all the employees of the Society. It is submitted that
the Society had 76 employees and they were transferred
amongst different units of Society as per requirement; also
they were sent to the outstations/elsewhere and for this
purpose they were also issued railway pass. It is submitted
by the Union that Hon’ble Apex Court in M.M.R. Khan
vs. Union of India, 1990 SC 937 AIR held that the
employees of such statutory canteens are to be treated as
Railway employee and as such, the Railway took over the
all the canteen along with entire establishment, including
its employees. It is alleged by the Union that on taking
over the establishment of Society the Railway absorbed
only 58 employees and terminated the 18 employees
without any rhyme or reason. It is submitted by the Union
that all the 76 employees were appointed by the
Administrator, Railway Men’s Consumer Co-operative
Society Ltd. and the Railway absorbed the employees by
adopting pick and choose method. It is also alleged by
the union that the management of NER absorbed Shri
Dhunai who was at serial No. 72 of the employees sparing
the workmen under present dispute viz. Shri Mo. Sagir
Khan S/o Nagir Khan, Ram Dev Singh S/o Jagat Singh,
Panpat Prasad S/o Balli, Ramakant Nishad S/o Jageshwar
Nishad, Kaushal Kishore Mishra S/o Brij Nandan Mishra,
Pramod Kumar Singh S/o Ram Adhin Singh, Hari Shankar
Ram S/o Basant Ram, Subhash Chandra S/o Hari Charan,
Tirthraj Giri S/o Bechu Goshain, Buddhi Ram s/o Shrawan,
Surya Bhan S/o Gorakh Nishad and Chandrma Prakash
Mishra S/o Babu Mishra. It is submitted that all the 12
workers were appointed by the Administrator w.e.f. 19.05.89
and working since then as casual labour/service boy and
their services had been terminated w.e.f. 04.07.90 instead
6260
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
of regularizing them. Accordingly, the Union has prayed
that the oral termination order dated 04.07.90 be set aside
and the workmen be regularized with consequential
benefits, including full back wages.
4.
The management of the NER has filed its written
statement; whereby it has denied the claim of the Union,
stating therein that the workmen under dispute had been
employees of the Society and they had never been
employees of the railway, therefore, there arise no question
of terminating their services at any point of time. It has
also been submitted that the Society was not registered
by the NER administration rather the same is registered
under Co-operative Societies, UP and the Rail
administration had no control over it. It is stated by the
management that the railway has been running canteens
through Co-operative Societies on ‘no profit no loss’ basis
for its employees and subsidy is being granted to such
Societies by the Railway. It is also stated that the Railway
administration has fixed certain number of employees in
such canteens and if the Societies appoint the employees
in excess, without approval of the Railways, then no
subsidy is being granted to such employees. It was further
submitted that the workmen under dispute are appointees
of such unapproved category who were appointed by the
Society. The railway does not recognize such employees
and no subscription were ever paid by the Societies and
the railway did not pay any salary to the workmen under
dispute. It has been pleaded that number of recognized
employees in the recognized/subsidized canteen by the
railway, before 01.04.90 was only 58 and rest employees
were appointed by the Society on its own and railway has
no relation with such employees. It has also been
submitted by the management that the railway paid
subsidy to 58 employees only and paid them salary etc.
and has also absorbed them. It is stated that the railway
has no concern with the other employees who have been
appointed by the Society without approval of the railways.
Accordingly, the management has prayed that the claim
of the workmen’s union be rejected being devoid of any
merit.
5.
The workmen’s union has field its rejoinder wherein
apart from reiterating the averments already made in the
statement of claim has introduced nothing new.
6.
The parties have filed number of documentary
evidence, which include original as well as photocopy.
The workmen, union has examined the workmen viz.
Panpat Prasad, Subhash Chandra, Hari Shankar Ram,
Kaushal Kishore, Rama Kant, Ram Dev Singh, Mo. Sageer
Khan, Pramod Kumar Singh and Suraj Bhan; whereas the
management examined Shri Amiya Rama, Senior Personnel
Officer, Shri Vishwamitra Mishra, Administrator, Consumer
Co-operative Society and Shri J.F Ahmed, Superintendent,
CPO Office in support their respective claim. The parties
availed opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses of each
other apart from forwarding oral arguments.
7.
Heard authorized representatives of the parties and
perused entire material available on record.
8.
The authorized representative of the workmen’s
union has contended that the workman had been working
in the Canteen run by Society, which was given subsidy
by the NER administration and on directives of the Hon’ble
Apex Court, the management absorbed only 58 employees
out of 76 employees working in such Canteens. It was
argued that the workmen under dispute have been
appointed by the administrator of the Canteen viz. Shri
Vishwamitra who has stated in his oral evidence before
this Court that he appointed them and their appointment
letters find reference on record. It is also contended by
the authorized representative that the management was
required to regularized all the employees, working in such
recognized/subsidized canteens; but it has spared the
workmen arbitrarily and has adopted pick and choose
method. It also regularized some juniors. It was pointed
out that one Shri Dhunai who was junior to the workmen
was regularized; whereas the services of the workmen
under dispute were terminated without any notice or
compensation instead of regularizing them.
9.
In rebuttal, the authorized representative of the
management has contended that the NER had no control
over the Society nor it was registered with the NER; rather
the same was registered with the Co-operative Society
U.P. It is also argued that the these canteens are run
through Consumer Societies on “no profit no loss basis”
as welfare measure and subsidy is being given towards
salary paid to the employees of such Canteen. It is urged
that number of employees in recognized union before
01.04.90 was 98 and rest were appointed by the Society
and the Railway has no relation with them; accordingly,
only 58 employees were regularized pursuant to the
directions given by Hon’ble Supreme Court.
10.
I have given my thoughtful consideration to the
rival submissions of the authorized representatives of the
parties and scanned entire evidence on record.
11.
The workmen’s union has examined workmen who
have stated that they have been appointed by the
Administrator of the Society viz. Shri Vishwamitra and their
appointment letter is on record. They also stated that the
Canteen had been taken over by the NER on 03.07.90 and
they were in employment on that date. It is also stated
that while absorbing no examination was taken of the
employees who were absorbed and Shri Dhunai who was
junior to them even then he was regularized. It was also
stated that no notice or compensation or charge sheet
was given to them.
In rebuttal, the management witness, Shri Amiya
Raman, Senior Personnel Officer has stated, referring paper
No. C-22 filed on 09.11.2005, that the Railway Board on
13.04.87, issued an order; whereby it notified that there
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6261
should not be any increase in the number of employees in
the canteens, therefore, the Society was required not to
increase the number of its employees. It was also stated
that claim of the workman, Mo. Sagir that he was appointed
on 01.06.89, is in contravention to the directions contained
in Railway Board’s letter dated 13.04.87. The management
witness, Shri Vishwamitra Mishra, Administrator, Consumer
Co-operative Society has stated that he was appointed
administrator in 88 and in capacity of Administrator he
was authorized to make appointment. It was admitted by
him that when he took charge the number of employees
were 58 and number of sanctioned employees were 74. It
was also admitted that the appointment letters which find
reference on record, paper no. 32/4 to 32/14 & 48/4 were in
his signatures; and Shri Dunai was also appointed by him
who was regularized.
12.
Having gone through the evidence, it becomes
apparent that the management has come up with the case;
firstly that the NER had no control over the Society but on
the other hand it has also pleaded that the Railway runs
canteen with the help of Society on no profit no loss basis
and subsidy is being given to pay salary to the employees
working in such canteen. Hence, in view of the above it
appears that the railway is trying to take two different
stand in the same situation i.e. the pleading of having no
control on one hand and then pleadings of running
Canteen with Society and extending subsidy to it on the
other. Therefore, the pleadings of the NER is not reliable
that it had no control over the Society/canteen
Secondly, the management has come up with the
case that approved number of the employees in recognized
canteens was 58 and accordingly, they were regularized,
sparing excess employees. But it could not show any
documentary proof that the sanctioned strength of such
employees were 58 only and any action was taken by the
management against the Administrator of such canteens
who appointed employees in excess to the sanctioned
strength without the approval of the Competent Authority/
Railway Board. It is not disputed that the Administrator
was authorized to make appointment. It was admitted by
him before this Tribunal that sanctioned strength of the
employees in the canteen was 74.
13.
It is also the case of the management that there
should not be any increase in the number of employees in
the canteens, therefore, the Society was required not to
increase the number of its employees in canteens vide
Railway Board’s letter dated 13.04.87. Therefore, any
appointment after the issuance of letter dated 13.04.87,
without approval of the Railways was illegal; hence need
not to be given any benefit.
From perusal of the appointment letters of the
workmen on record and statement of the workman’s witness
and Management witnesses, it becomes crystal clear that
the letter dated 13.04.87 of the Railway Board, relied on by
the management, had come into force much before
appointment of the Administrator, Shri Viswamitra Mishra
who was appointed in the year 1988 and appointment of
workmen under dispute, who were appointed on 01.06.89.
The letter dated 13/4/87 is reproduced hereunder:
“No. E(W)83CN1-8
New Delhi, dated 13/4/87
The General Managers,
All India Railways Including
CLW, DLW, ICF, W&A Plant, Bangalore
And Metro Railway, Calcutta.
The Director General
R.D.S.O.
Lucknow
The Principal
IRISET
Secunderabad.
The Chief Administrative Officer
Diesel Component Works
Patiala
Sub : Setting up of new statutory/non-statutory canteens
on the Railways.
Attention is invited to the provisions contained in
para 2031 of the Indian Railway Establishment Manual,
governing the principles for setting up of canteens on the
Railways which inter-alia lay down that “any scheme for
the provision of new canteens should be submitted to the
Board for approval indicating the financial implications
duly vetted by the FA&CAO”. Further, instructions were
conveyed vide Board’s letter No. E(W) 63CN1-2 dated
9/7/63 specifically in respect of non-statutory canteens
provided other than under the Factories Act, 1948.
2.
Board desire that the above instructions should be
reiterated to the Zonal Railways etc. to ensure full
compliance with the manual provisions. Accordingly, no
commitment should be made nor expenditure incurred for
setting up of new statutory/non-statutory canteens as
also increase in the staff strength in any of the existing
canteens without Board’s prior approval.
-sd-
(P. L. N. SHARMA)
Desk Officer, Estt. (Welfare)
Railway Board.”
The management of Railways has contended that
when the Railway had issued instructions vide above letter
dated 13/4/87, any appointment in the Canteen thereafter,
was in contravention to the instructions contained in letter
dated 13.04.87; hence, appointments made by the
Administrator was not just hence the same could not be
regularized. But from perusal of above letter dated 13.04.87
it is very much clear that the above instructions were for
seeking prior approval of the Board before setting up of
6262
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
new statutory/non-statutory canteens on the Railways
and not for the appointment of employees in the statutory/
non-statutory canteens already running/existing. Hence,
the case of the Society/Canteen in the present case is not
governed by the letter dated 13.04.87 of the Railway Board.
Therefore, the appointment made by the Administrator,
who was authorized to make appointment in the Canteen
cannot be said to be illegal, inasmuch as the Railway paid
salary to the workmen under question vide paper No. C-81
to C-90.
The management witness, in his examination-in-chief
has stated that sanctioned strength was 58 only and in
the salary bill for the month of March, 90 names of 18
persons was increased to give undue benefit in the light
of Hon’ble High Court’s order. But there is no evidence
on record to show that the Railway took any corrective
measure against above payment, which was made in excess
to the sanctioned strength. This goes to show that actually
the sanctioned strength was more than 58 and the Canteen/
Society in question was not governed by the instructions
issued vide letter dated 13.04.87 of the Board. The
management of NER was required to regularize the services
of the workmen under dispute with other workmen who on
the rolls of the society on 03.07.90. The management acted
arbitrarily and adopted pick and choose method; and
instead of regularizing the services of the workmen,
terminated their services orally w.e.f. 04.07.90 without
following the due procedure laid down in the Industrial
Disputes Act, 1947.
14.
The workman has come up with the case that the
management regularized one Shri Dhunai who was junior
to the workmen under dispute. In this regard the statement
of management witness, Shri Vishwamitra Mishra, the
Administrator is relevant, in his cross-examination it was
stated that he appointed Shri Dhunai in the Canteen who
has been regularized and is working as regular appointee
as on date. From above statement of Shri Vishwamitra it
comes out that all the workmen under dispute as well as
Shri Dhunai were appointed by him. Therefore, the
appointments made by Shri Vishwamitra after 1988, if they
were governed by the letter dated 13.04.87, then all of
them were injust and all of them including, Dhunai were
not liable to be regularized. Here in the instant case the
management has regularized Dhunai, who was appointed
after 1988, this again goes to show that provisions of letter
dated 13.04.87 were not applicable on the Society/Canteen
under dispute and the action of the management of NER
in not regularizing the services of the workmen under
dispute was illegal as it regularized another workman
Dhunai who was appointed by the same Administrator
after issuance of letter dated 13.04.87.
15.
Therefore, in view of the facts and circumstances of
case and discussions made hereinabove, I am of the
considered opinion that the workmen were appointed by
the Administrator of the canteen; and all the workmen,
under dispute were required to be regularized in terms of
directions of Hon’ble Apex Court; accordingly, I come to
the conclusion that the action of the management of NER
in not regularizing the workmen and terminating them w.e.f.
04.07.1990 was not only illegal but also unjustified.
Therefore, the workmen whose cause is espoused in the
present industrial dispute are entitled for reinstatement &
regularization w.e.f. 03.07.1990, the date when the canteen
was taken over by the NER.
16.
Award as above.
Dr. MANJU NIGAM, Presiding Officer
LUCKNOW.
20th August, 2014
ubZ fnYyh] 8 flrEcj] 2014
dk-vk- 2468-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947
dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj Hkkjrh; LVsV
cSad ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp]
vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd
vfèkdj.k] ukxiqj ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 03@2011) dks izdkf'kr
djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 8@9@2014 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&12011@30@2010&vkbZvkj (ch&I)º
lqefr ldykuh] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh
New Delhi, the 8th September, 2014
S.O. 2468.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 03/2011)
of the Cent. Govt. Indus. Tribunal-cum-Labour Court,
Nagpur as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute
between the management of State Bank of India and
their workmen, received by the Central Government on
08/09/2014.
[No. L-12011/30/2010-IR (B-I)]
SUMATI SAKLANI, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE SHRI J.P. CHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER,
CGIT-CUM-LABOUR COURT, NAGPUR
Case No. CGIT/NGP/03/2011
Date: 27.08.2014.
Party No. 1 : The Asstt. General Manager (Admin.),
State Bank of India, Regional Office,
Region VI, Sardar Vallabbhai Patel
Marg, Kingsway, Nagpur (M.S.).
Versus
Party No. 2 : The Vice President,
State Bank of India Staff Union,
C/o State Bank of India,
Regional Office, Kingsway,
Nagpur (M.S.).
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6263
AWARD
(Dated: 27th August, 2014)
In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of
sub-section (1) and sub-section 2(A) of Section 10 of
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) (“the Act” in
short), the Central Government has referred the industrial
dispute between the employers, in relation to the
management of State Bank of India and their workman,
Shri A.B. Jadhav, for adjudication, as per letter No.L-12011/
30/2010-IR (B-I) dated 30.03.2011, with the following
schedule:-
“Whether the action of the management of State
Bank of India Region VI Nagpur, in imposing the
punishment of dismissal on Shri A.B. Jadhav, Ex
Messenger, on the basis of departmental enquiry
with effect from 20.07.2007 is legal and justified? If
not, what relief the workman is entitled to?”
2.
On receipt of the reference, the parties were noticed
to file their respective statement of claim and written
statement, in response to which, the workman Shri A.B.
Jadhav, (“the workman” in short) filed the statement of
claim and the management of State Bank of India, (“Party
No. 1” in short) filed their written statement.
The case of the workman as presented in the
statement of claim is that he was working as a Messenger
at Mahagaon Branch of Party No. 1, situated in the district
of Yavatmal and on 12.11.2002, he was detailed in the cash
department and on that date, one of the customers of the
branch, namely, M/s Manoj Traders tendered a cheque
for cash withdrawal, but the said customer failed to collect
the payment till the end of the day and as such, the cashier
handed over the cash to Shri Sonkusare, the In-charge
Dy. Manager (Cash) in total adherence of the norms of the
Bank and it was alleged that Shri Sonkusare kept the said
cash of Rs. 30,000 in an unlocked drawer of the cash
department and in late hours of the night, it was found
that the cash of Rs. 30,000 was missing and on 13.11.2002,
Shri A.N. Khandale, one of the guards of the Bank allegedly
received a phone call from one Mr. Deshmukh from
Umarkhed and the said telephonic talk revealed that the
Dy. Manager (Cash) had given Mr. Deshmukh Rs. 30,000
and the amount of Rs. 30,000 was dropped in the Post Box
at Pusad and the Branch Manager enquired about the
same from the Post Master and an amount of Rs. 20,000 in
an envelope was found in the said post box and the rest
amount Rs. 10,000 was found by him (workman) in the
branch premises and he promptly handed over the said
amount to the Branch Manager and without holding any
preliminary enquiry, the Party No. 1 filed a F.I.R. on
16.11.2002 at the police station, Pusad and in the said
F.I.R., he was arrayed as the prime suspect and he
approached the Competent Court and was released on
anticipatory bail and he continued to work in the branch.
The further case of the workman is that on 08.03.2006, a
charge sheet was served on him on the allegation that the
cash of Rs. 30,000, which was kept by the In-charge Dy.
Manager (Cash) in the drawer of central table of cash
department was stolen by him and the alleged incident
was of the year 2002 and charge sheet was given on
08.03.2006 and there was no explanation as to why there
was delay of about almost four years in giving the charge-
sheet and the delay in serving the charge-sheet and
conducting the departmental enquiry itself goes to show
that he was not responsible for the incident and as the
matter was reported in the news paper, somebody was
required to make the scapegoat and on the above
allegations, the enquiry was conducted against him and
he witnesses of the Bank spoke like puppet, before the
Enquiry Officer, as they wanted to save the officer of the
Bank and management failed to bring home the guilt against
him, but in spite of the same, he was held guilty of the
charges and the punishment of his removal from services
was passed and the appeal preferred by him, before the
Appellate Authority was also rejected and the punishment
was imposed against him only on mere suspicion, which
is clear from the order of the Appellate Authority and the
punishment is shockingly disproportionate, looking to the
service conditions of messengers and the findings of the
Enquiry Officer are far away from the evidence on record
and he was made the scapegoat to save the officer and the
findings of the Enquiry Officer are patently perverse and
required to be quashed and set aside and the Disciplinary
Authority without considering the materials on record
independently, simply believing on the report of the
Enquiry Officer passed the order of punishment on
20.07.2007.
It is further pleaded by the workman that he was
acquitted in the criminal case registered against him U/s
381 of I.P.C. on 25.02.2011 by the Judicial Magistrate First
Class and in view of his acquittal in the criminal case, the
punishment imposed against him in the departmental
enquiry is to be set aside and his past clean and
unblemished service record was not considered while
inflicting the punishment and the Party No. 1 has already
recovered a sum of Rs. 20,000 from him and as such, there
was no loss to Party No. 1 and he is entitle for reinstatement
in service with continuity and full back wages.
3.
In the written statement, the Party No. 1 has pleaded
inter-alia that the workman was working as messenger in
cash department at Pusad Branch from June, 1993 to
08.12.2003 and on 21.11.2002, a customer, M/s Manoj
Traders tendered a cheque of Rs. 30,000 for cash payment,
through an employee and the said customer did not turn
up till 5.30 p.m., so the dealing cashier handed over the
cash to the cash officer, in presence of the Deputy Head
Cashier and the Cash Officer kept the said cash in the
drawer of the center table kept inside the strong room of
6264
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
the branch before leaving the branch and the cash officer
had doubt about locking of the drawer and hence, the
cash officer and the Deputy Head Cashier returned to the
branch at about 8.30 p.m. to verify as to whether the drawer
was locked or not and they reopened the locker and found
the cash missing and the Head Cashier reported the matter
to the Branch Manager and on enquiry by the Branch
Manager, the temporary Watchman revealed that at about
7.30 p.m., he along with the workman entered the cash
cabin, where the cash was kept, to check the almirahs and
strong room etc and on 13.11.2002, the workman handed
over cash of Rs. 10,000/- to the Branch Manager stating
that the same was lying near the center table of cash
department and on 13.11.2002 itself, the Watchman on duty
received a phone call at about 8.30 p.m. and the caller
informed the Watchman about someone putting of
Rs. 20,000/- in the letter box of Pusad Post Office and the
Branch Manager recovered Rs. 20,000/- from the Postal
Authorities after lodging the F.I.R. and all the facts and
circumstances of the incident pointed out the needle of
suspicion towards the workman and as such, after making
enquiry and collecting relevant documents, the matter was
reported to the controllers of the Branch and a charge
sheet was submitted against the workman on 08.03.2006
and a supplementary charge sheet was submitted on
29.08.2006 and the workman was asked to submit his
explanation and as the explanation submitted by the
workman was found not satisfactory, it decided to hold
the enquiry against him and the enquiry commenced on
12.07.2006 and the same was concluded on 10.11.2006 and
there were nine sittings in total and the Bank examined
seven witnesses and produced 23 documents in support
of its case and the workman was represented by the
experienced and competent union representative and the
witnesses for the management were cross-examined by
the defence representative of the workman and the
workman also submitted his written submission to the
Enquiry Officer on 21.11.2006 and the Enquiry Officer
submitted his report on 30.11.2006, holding all the charges
to have been proved against the workman and the
Disciplinary Authority agreed with the findings of the
Enquiry Officer and show cause notice dated 15.03.2007
was issued to the workman along with the copy of the
report of the Enquiry Officer and show cause notice dated
15.03.2007 was issued to the workman along with the copy
of the report of the Enquiry Officer, to show cause against
the proposed punishment of removal from services with
superannuation benefits and the workman submitted his
reply to the show cause notice on 19.04.2007 and the
workman was granted personal hearing on 26.06.2007 and
the Disciplinary Authority duly considered the enquiry
report and examined the entire matter independently and
passed the final order of punishment of removal of the
workman from services with superannuation benefits and
the workman preferred an appeal against the order of
punishment before the appellate Authority on 05.09.2007
and opportunity of personal hearing was given to the
workman on 05.10.2007 and the Appellate Authority after
considering all the facts and circumstances of the case,
dismissed the appeal by order dated 20.05.2009 and the
workman is not entitled to any relief.
4.
In the rejoinder, the workman has reiterated some of
the facts as already mentioned in the statement of claim.
5.
As this is a case of removal of the workman from
services as a punishment, after conducting of a
departmental enquiry, the fairness or otherwise of the
departmental enquiry was taken up as a preliminary issued
for consideration and vide order dated 21.01.2014, the
departmental enquiry conducted against the workman was
held to be legal, proper and in accordance with the principles
of natural justice.
6.
At the time of argument, it was submitted by the
learned advocate for the workman that at the time of
submission of the charge sheet against the workman, he
had already rendered 21years of service as messenger/
peon and his service record was clean and unblemished
and it is clear from the materials on record that the workman
found a cash of Rs. 10,000/- in the branch premises and he
handed over the same promptly to the Branch Manager
and without holding any preliminary enquiry at the branch
level of the Bank or the Bank level, the Bank Authorities
filed a FIR on 16.11.2002 at Pusad Police Station arraying
the workman as he prime suspect and on 08.03.2006, the
charge sheet was submitted against the workman and the
workman was made the scape-goat and the charges
levelled against the workman were totally bogus and
concocted and there was delay of almost four years in
submitting the charge sheet and there was no explanation
for such delay and as such, there was violation of the
principles of natural justice and in the enquiry, the
witnesses examined by the management spoke like
puppets, because, they wanted to save the officers
involved in the incident and management also failed to
prove the charges levelled against the workman and only
on the basis of suspicion, it was held by the Enquiry Officer
that the charges were proved against the workman and
the findings of the Enquiry Officer are far away from the
evidence on record and without scrutinizing the evidence
in its proper perspective, the Enquiry Officer reached into
wrong conclusions and the findings of the Enquiry Officer
are perverse and the Appellate Authority also without
application of mind and basing on the perverse findings
of the enquiry Officer imposed the punishment of removal
of the workman from service and the punishment is
shockingly disproportionate and as such, the punishment
is to be quashed and set aside.
It was further submitted by the learned advocate for
the workman that the workman was acquitted in the
criminal case by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class
by judgment dated 25.02.2011 and the judicial finding
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6265
should prevail over the administrative finding and on that
ground also, the punishment inflicted upon the workman
is required to be quashed and set aside. It was also
submitted by the learned advocate for the workman that
before inflicting the punishment, the past clean and
unblemished service record of the workman was not
considered by the Authority and Bank has already
recovered the sum of Rs. 20,000/- from the workman and
as such, the Bank has not put into any loss and on that
grounds also the punishment is liable to be set aside and
the workman is entitled for his reinstatement in service
with continuity, full back wages and all other consequential
benefits.
7.
Per contra, it was submitted by the learned advocate
for the party No.1 that the workman has drafted the
statement of claim as if he is in appeal before the Tribunal
and the workman has made an attempt to prove that
departmental enquiry is like a criminal trial and principles
of criminal jurisprudence are applicable to such enquiry
and the power of this tribunal is of review only, except
when it is found that the enquiry is held against the
principles of natural justice or that the punishment is
shockingly disproportionate to the misconduct, as
provided under section 11-A of the Act.
It was further submitted by the learned advocate for
the party No.1 that where the Tribunal does not find any
fault with the proceeding conducted by the enquiry officer,
it does not have any jurisdiction to re-appreciate the
evidence and set aside the order of the disciplinary
authority on the ground of insufficiency of evidence to
prove the charges and Tribunal cannot sit in appeal over
the findings of the disciplinary authority and in this case
it has already been held by the Tribunal that the
departmental enquiry held against the workman to be valid
and the findings of the enquiry officer are based on the
evidence on record and not an any extraneous material
and in the entire statement of claim, there is no whisper as
to how the findings of the enquiry officer are perverse and
a such, it cannot be said that the findings are perverse. It
was also submitted that in banking business, absolute
devotion, diligence, integrity and honesty need to be
preserved by every bank employee and the charges
proved against the workman are serious in nature and the
bank has lost confidence in the workman and as such, the
punishment imposed against the workman cannot be said
to be shockingly disproportionate and the punishment is
just and proper and there is no scope to interfere with the
punishment and therefore, the workman is not entitled to
any relief.
In support of the contentions, reliance was placed
by the learned advocate for the party No.1 on the decisions
reported in 2005 SCC (L&S)-567 (Damoh Panna Sagar Rural
Regional Bank Vs. Munna Lal Jain), 2005-SCC (L & S)-200
(D.M. Plantation Div. Andaman Nicobar Islands Vs.
Munna Barriok, 1998 (4) SSC-310 (Union Bank of India Vs.
Vishaw Mohan), 1999 LAB IC-3833 (SC) (High Court of
Judicature, Bombay Vs. S.S. Patil), (2011) 2 SCC (L & S)-
461 (Samar Bahadur Singh Vs. State of UP), AIR 1989 SC-
1185 (Union of India Vs. Parmananda), 2005 SCC (L & S)-
407 (Div. Controller Vs. A.T. Mane), (2010) 2 SCC (L& S)-
239 (UPSRTC Vs. Suresh Chand), 2003 SCC (L & S)-468
(CMD, UCO Bank Vs. P.C. Kakkar), 2005 SCC (L & S)-833
(Canara Bank Vs. V.K. Awasthy) and some others.
Now, keeping in view the principles enunciated by
the Hon’ble Apex Court in the decisions cited by the
learned advocate for the party No.1, the present case in
hand is to be considered.
8.
Before delving into the merit of the matter, I think it
proper to mention the settled principles regarding the
power of a Tribunal in interfering with punishment awarded
by the competent authority in departmental proceedings
and regarding the effect of acquittal of an employee by a
criminal court, against whom a departmental proceedings
was also initiated, by the Hon’ble Apex Court.
9.
First of all, I will take up the contention raised by the
learned advocate for the workman that inspite of the clean
cut acquittal of the workman ion the criminal case and
production of the order of acquittal before the concerned
authorities of the party No.1, they did not consider the
same and proceeded with the departmental proceedings
and imposed the punishment and as such, the punishment
imposed against the workman is liable to be set aside.
In this regard, it is well settled in a number of
decisions by the Hon’ble Apex Court that, “Question of
considering reinstatement after decision of acquittal or
discharge by a competent criminal court arises only and
only if dismissal from services was based on conviction
by criminal court in view of provisions of Art. 311 (2) second
proviso (a) of Constitution or analogous provisions in
statutory rules applicable in a case. In case where enquiry
is independent of criminal proceedings, acquittal in a
criminal court, domestic inquiry can be held, since standard
of proof required in a domestic enquiry and that in a criminal
case are different and facts, charges and nature of evidence,
etc. involved in an individual case would determine as to
whether decision of acquittal would have any bearing on
the findings recorded in the domestic inquiry and once
the delinquent employee was found guilty of all the
charges and there was due adherence to natural justice
while conducting domestic enquiry, punishment of
dismissal was proportionate to delinquency.”
It is also well settled by the Hon’ble Apex Court
that, “Criminal prosecution vis-à-vis departmental action-
Standard of proof- In criminal case, proof required is proof
beyond reasonable doubt, while in domestic enquiry it is
proof on preponderance of probabilities.”
6266
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
Judging the present case in hand with the touch
stone of the principles as mentioned above, it is found
that the departmental enquiry conducted against the
workman was independent of the criminal proceedings
and the dismissal of the workman from service was not
based on conviction of the Criminal court. It is also found
that the charges levelled against the workman and the
witnesses examined in the departmental inquiry and
criminal cases were not the same were identical. Hence,
the acquittal of the workman in the criminal case is of no
help to him and there was nothing wrong on the part of
the authorities of party No.1 in not taking into
consideration the acquittal of the workman in the criminal
case.
9.
So far the jurisdiction of the Tribunal to interfere
with the disciplinary matter of punishment is concerned,
in a number of decisions including in the decisions cited
by the learned advocate for the party No.1 in this regard,
the Hon’ble Apex Court have held that :-
“The jurisdiction of the Tribunal to interfere with
the disciplinary matters of punishment cannot be equated
with an appellate jurisdiction. The Tribunal cannot interfere
with the findings of the Inquiry officer or competent
authority where they are not arbitrary or utterly perverse.
The power to impose penalty on a delinquent officer is
conferred on the competent authority either by an Act of
legislature or rules made under the provison to Article 309
of the Constitution of India. If there has been an enquiry
consistent with the rules and in accordance with principles
of natural justice what punishment would meet the ends
of justice is a matter exclusively within the jurisdiction of
the competent authority. If the penalty can lawfully be
imposed and is imposed on the proved misconduct, the
Tribunal has no power to substitute its own discretion for
that of the authority. The adequacy of penalty unless it is
malafide is certainly not a matter of the Tribunal to concern
itself with. The Tribunal also cannot interfere with the
penalty if the conclusion of the Inquiry officer or the
competent authority is based on evidence even if some of
it is found to be irrelevant or extraneous to the matter.
In departmental proceedings, the disciplinary
authority is the sole judge of facts and in case an appeal is
presented to the appellate authority, the appellate authority
has also the power/and jurisdiction to re-appreciate the
evidence and come to its own conclusion, on facts, being
the sole fact-finding authorities. Once findings of fact,
based on appreciation of evidence are recorded, the High
Court in writ jurisdiction may not normally interfere with
those factual findings unless it finds that the recorded
findings were based either on no evidence or that the
findings were wholly perverse and/or legally untenable.
The adequacy or inadequacy of the evidence is not
permitted to be canvassed before the High Court. Since
the High Court does not sit as an appellate authority over
the factual findings recorded during departmental
proceedings, while exercising the power of judicial review,
the High Court cannot, normally speaking, substitute its
own conclusion, with regard to the guilt of the delinquent,
for that of the departmental authorities. Even insofar as
imposition of penalty or punishment is concerned, unless
the punishment or penalty imposed by the disciplinary or
the departmental appellate authority, is either impermissible
or such that it shocks the conscience of the High Court, it
should not normally substitute its own opinion and impose
some other punishment or penalty. Both the learned Single
Judge and the Division Bench of the High Court, it appears,
ignored the well-settled principle that even though judicial
review of administrative action must remain flexible and
its dimension not closed, yet the Court, in exercise of the
power of judicial review, is not concerned with the
correctness of the findings of fact on the basis of which
the orders are made so long as those findings are
reasonably supported by evidence and have been arrived
at through proceedings which cannot be faulted with for
procedural illegalities or irregularities which vitiate the
process by which the decision was arrived at. Judicial
review, it must be remembered, is directed not against the
decision, but is confined to the examination of the decision-
making process.
Departmental enquiry is not bound by the strict rules
of evidence Act, but by fair play and natural justice. Only
total absence but not sufficiency of evidence before
Tribunal is ground for interference by court.”
Applying the settled principles as mentioned above
to the case in hand, it is found that this is not a case of no
evidence or that the findings of the Enquiry Officer are
totally against the evidence on record. From the materials
on record, it is found that the Enquiry Officer has based
his findings on the materials on record of the enquiry and
not on any extraneous material. The Enquiry Officer has
also assigned reasons in support of his findings. So, the
findings of the Enquiry Officer cannot be said to be
perverse.
10.
So far the proportionality of the punishment is
concerned, it was submitted by the learned advocate for
the workman that the amount of Rs. 20,000/- was already
recovered from the workman and there was no loss to the
party No.1 and as such, the punishment of dismissal of
the workman from service is patently a harsh punishment
and the same is liable to be set aside. It is to be mentioned
here that it is well settled that absence of any lost to the
bank is no defence. A Bank employee has to exercise a
higher degree of honesty and integrity. The charges
levelled against the workman and proved in a properly
conducted departmental enquiry were not casual, but
serious in nature. So, the punishment of removal of the
workman from service with superannuation benefits
cannot be said to be shockingly disproportionate, call for
any interference. Hence, it is ordered:-
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6267
The action of the management of State Bank of India
Region VI Nagpur, in imposing the punishment of dismissal
on Shri A.B. Jadhav, Ex Messenger, on the basis of
departmental enquiry with effect from 20.07.2007 is legal
and justified. The workman is not entitled to any relief.
J. P. CHAND, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 8 flrEcj] 2014
dk-vk- 2469-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947
dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj mÙkj jsyos
izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp vuqcaèk esa
fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k
y[kumQ ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 10@2007) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS]
tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 8@9@2014 dks izkIr gqvk Fkk A
¹la- ,y&41012@174@2004&vkbZvkj (ch&I)º
lqefr ldykuh] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh
New Delhi, the 8th September, 2014
S.O. 2469.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. 10/2007) of
the Cent. Govt. Indus. Tribunal-cum-Labour Court,
Lucknow as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial
dispute between the management of North Railway and
their workmen, received by the Central Government on
08/09/2014.
[No. L-41012/174/2004-IR (B-I)]
SUMATI SAKLANI, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL
TRIBUNAL–CUM-LABOUR COURT LUCKNOW
PRESENT : Dr. MANJU NIGAM, Presiding Officer
I.D. No. 10/2007
Ref. No. L-41012/174/2004-IR(B-I) dated 14.02.2007
BETWEEN
Shri Dwarika, S/o Shri Bache Lal
Gangman, Village – Jignia Kala
Post – Bahorva, Janpad
Hardoi (Distt.)
AND
The Station Master
Northern Railway
Railway Administration
Hardoi (Distt.)
AWARD
1.
By order No. L-41012/174/2004-IR(B-I) dated
14.02.2007 the Central Government in the Ministry of
Labour, New Delhi in exercise of powers conferred by
clause (d) of sub section (1) and sub section (2A) of Section
10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) referred
this industrial dispute between Shri Dwarika, S/o
Shri Bache Lal, Gangman, Village – Jignia Kala, Post –
Bahorva, Janpad, Hardoi (Distt.) and the Station Master,
Northern Railway, Railway Administration, Hardoi (Distt.)
and the Station Master, Northern Railway, Railway
Administration, Hardoi (Distt.) for adjudication to this
CGIT-cum-Labour Court, Lucknow.
2.
The reference under adjudication is:
¶D;k xSaxesu Jh }kfjdk iq=k csps yky] fuoklh xzke ftfxfu;k¡
dyk¡] iksLV cgksjok¡] tuin gjnksbZ dks jsy iz'kklu }kjk ewyr% ,d
vkdfLed Jfed ds :i esa fu;qfDr mijkUr fnukad 31-12-77 ls
LFkk;h djus ds mijkUr mldk LFkkukUrj.k LVs'ku ekLVj gjkZokyk
(nsgjknwu) fd;k tkuk ,oa Jh }kfjdk }kjk ogk¡ 23-10-87 ls 14-12-
88 ,oa e.Myh; jsy izcU/d] mÙkj jsyos] eqjknkckn esa fnukad 15-
12-88 ls 6-2-89 rd dk;Z e.My jsy izcU/d] mÙkj jsyos eqjknkckn
ds LFkkukUrj.k vkns'k i=k la[;k&bZ@10@'ka-iks-@89 fnukad 7-2-89 ds
mijkUr Hkh Jh }kfjdk dks xSaxesu ds in ij jsy iFk fujh{kd] m-
jsyos] gjnksbZ ,oa LVs'ku ekLVj] m- jsyos] gjnksbZ }kjk fcuk dkj.k
dk;Z ij u fy;k tkuk U;k;ksfpr gS \ ;fn ugha rks deZdkj fdl
ikfjrksf"kd dks ikus dk vf/dkjh gS\¸
3.
The case of the workman, Dwarika, in brief, is that
he was engaged against regular vacant post of class IV
employee on 31.12.1977 by the opposite party and worked
as such, continuously for 12 years and 6 months. It is
stated by the workman that during his service period he
was not given any warning or charge sheet, even then the
management has dismissed him from services maliciously.
It has been alleged by the workman that the management
has dismissed him from services without any notice or
charge sheet or any written order or any formal domestic
inquiry. Accordingly, the workman has prayed that the
management of the railways may be directed to reinstate
him into the services with continuity in services and back
wages.
4.
The management of the Northern Railway has
submitted its written statement denying the allegations of
the workman; wherein it has submitted that the workman
was engaged as category D staff and was promoted to the
post of the post of shunting porter vide order dated
11.08.87 and was relieved to join his duty under the Station
Master, NR, Harrawala on 23.10.87. On joining to his new
place of duty the workman as required to undergo a
psychological test/examination; but he could not succeed
the same, resultantly, the workman as reverted back to his
original post of Gangman vide letter dated 07.02.89. On
reversion/transfer back to his original post in DRM, NR,
Moradabd the workman did not report to join his duties at
Hardoi without assigning any reason or protest. It has
been stated by the management that it was the workman
who did not turn for joining the duty at his transfer place
not moved any application regarding leave etc. It is
specifically stated by the management that the no dismissal
order has been passed by the management against the
workman till date. Accordingly, the management has
pleaded that it is not the management who has dismissed
6268
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
his services but actually it is the workman who did not
turn at his transfer place to join his duties since 07.02.89.
The management has also submitted that the workman
has preferred present industrial dispute after a long gap of
about 18 years, hence the claim of the workman is liable to
be rejected being stale one and also being devoid of any
merit.
5.
The workman has filed his rejoinder; wherein apart
from stating the averment already made in the statement
of claim the workman has submitted that the management
of railways has transferred him to Hardoi without serving
any order of demotion etc. and he appeared before Rail
Track Inspector on 07.02.89 but he did not allow him to
join the duties. Regarding delay the workman has stated
that the Government after analyzing the causes of delay,
explained in the conciliation proceedings, has referred the
present industrial dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal
hence, the plea of delay is not maintainable at this juncture.
6.
Parties filed documentary evidence as well as
adduced oral evidence in support of their respective claim.
The workman has examined himself whereas the
management has examined Shri Sanjay Kuamr Srivastava,
Rail Track Inspector, NR, Hardoi in support of their
pleadings. The parties availed opportunity to cross-
examine the witnesses of each other apart from forwarding
oral arguments in support of their case.
7.
The authorized representative of the workman has
contended that the workman on being transferred back to
Hardoi, reported on duty but he was not allowed to join
the duties. It is also argued that the workman has been
terminated by the management without serving any notice
or charge sheet or conducting any formal inquiry against
him, which amounted to the violation of the principles of
natural justice.
8.
Per contra, the authorized representative of the
management has argued that when the workman could
not qualify the prescribed medical test after his promotion
to the post of Shunting Porter, he was reverted back to his
original post and was transferred back to Hardoi; but he
seldom turned up at Hardoi to join his post and is absented
himself since 07.02.89. It is also contended by the
management that it has not dismissed the workman as no
dismissal order has been passed by the management till
date, therefore, there is no question of violation of
principles of natural justice whatsoever.
9.
I have given my thoughtful consideration to the
rival contentions of the authorized representatives of the
parities and perused the record available in light thereto.
10.
The workman in his examination-in- chief has stated
that he has been transferred to Harrawala at Dehradun on
the post of Shunting Porter where he worked as such. On
14.12.88 he was transferred to DRM, Moradabad and
therefore, he appeared before DRM, Moradabad from
15.12.88 to 06.02.89 but he was not given any order for
joining at any other station. On 07.02.89 he was ordered
to join his duties on the post of Gangman at Hardoi Railway
Station, which was accepted by him but he was not allowed
to join since 07.02.88 till date. In cross-examination he has
stated that he was transferred from Harrawala to
Moradabad, from where he was directed to join at PWI
Office, Hardoi on the post of Gangman. It is also stated by
the workman that he made a protest representation before
DRM regarding asking him to join as Gangman when he
has passed the training for Shunting Porter. The workman
has stated that he was directed to join as Gangman vide
letter dated 07.02.89, the photocopy of which is paper No.
11/6. He also stated that he did not furnished the copy of
letter dated 07.02.89, paper No. 11/6 to the office Clerk of
PWI Office. It has also come in the evidence that he had
filed a case in the Central Administrative Tribunal. It was
further stated that he went to the PWI office, Hardoi lastly
in 1989 and at few occasions thereafter, but could not tell
the specific dates.
11.
The management has examined Shri Sanjay Kumar
Srivastava, Section Engineer, NR, Hardoi who stated in
his cross-examination that the workman was recruited on
the post of Gangman at Hardoi in 1970 and was made
permanent w.e.f. 31.12.77; and worked as such, till October,
1987 at Hardoi. He also stated that the workman was sent
to Moradabad from Harrawala and thereafter from
Moradabad he was sent to Hardoi Railway station on the
post of Gangman on 07.02.89. It was stated by the
management witness that keeping absent for long without
leave application is gross misconduct. He has further
deposed that the workman on transfer to Hardoi did not
turn either at Hardoi or at Moradabad or at Harrawala and
his attendance was not found marked at any place. The
management witness stated that no charge sheet was given
to the workman and no domestic inquiry was done in the
matter and also the workman was not paid any retrenchment
compensation etc.
12.
It is admitted case of the parties that the workman
was appointed on the post of Gangman w.e.f. 31.12.77 and
was promoted to the post of Shunting Porter and was
posted at Harrawala Station at Dehradun. Subsequently,
he was transferred to Moradabad Division from where he
was directed to join his duties as Gangman vide order
dated 07.02.89, paper No. 11/6, relied on by the workman.
It is the case of the workman that he reported on duty at
Hardoi Railway Station on 07.02.89 but he was not allowed
to join the services; on the contrary the management has
come up with the case that the workman never turned up
to join his duties at Hardoi Railway Station. The workman
has filed copy of letter dated 11.04.2003, paper No. 11/10-
11/12; and its subsequent reminder dated 02.03.2004, paper
No. 11/8, addressed to DRM, Moradabad regarding not
allowing the workman, Dwarika to join the services at
Hardoi. This goes to show that the workman for the first
time represented before the DRM, Moradabad for non-
joining on 11.04.2003 and thereafter a reminder was also
moved vide dated 02.03.3004. Further, the management
has filed copy of order dated 23.04.2001 in O.A. No. 546/
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6269
1994 between Dwarika vs. DRM, NR, Moradabad & others,
paper No. 21/221/3, filed before Central Administrative
Tribunal, Lucknow. Learned Tribunal while dismissing
the above original application, after considering the same
on merit, has observed as under:
4. From the documents of record, Annexures A-5 to
A-9, it appears that the applicant approached the
PWI, Hardoi to join the post after Annexure-A-4
was passed. However, the applicant was not allowed
to join. Though copies of Annexures-A-5 to A-9
have been filed but there is no receipt of these
representations. The respondents in para 11 of their
counter have submitted that Annexures A-5 to A-9
were not submitted by the applicant in the office of
the respondents, and no such representation is
pending. We also find that copies of the
representations Annexed at Annexures A-5 to A-9
do not bear any endorsement of receipt nor there is
any postal receipt for sending these representations
to the office of the respondents. As there is no
averment to show that these representations were
actually sent by the applicant to the respondents,
accordingly, it is held that these representations were
never sent by the applicant. In the absence of these
representations, if the applicant had any grievance
in the year 1989, he could have approached the
Tribunal within one year as per the provisions of
Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985. The O.A. was,
however, filed in the year 1994. Delay has not been
explained, nor there is any application for
condonation of delay. Accordingly, the O.A. is
barred by limitation.
From bare perusal of the above order of the learned
Tribunal it comes out that when the original application,
preferred by the workman, was dismissed by the Tribunal
on the point of unexplained delay and non-pendency of
any representation regarding not allowing him to join the
services, the workman tried to prepare grounds for his
present claim and moved the representation dated
11.04.2003, paper No. 11/10-11/12; and its subsequent
reminder dated 02.03.2004, paper No. 11/8 and submitted
the same to the management by registered post.
13.
The workman’s allegation is that he appeared at
Hardoi Railway Station in pursuance to the transfer orders;
but the authorities there did not allow him to join the
services on 07.02.89. The workman could not show any
evidence regarding this fact that he approached Hardoi
Railway Station after 07.02.89 for joining. He also could
not lead any evidence to the effect that on denial of joining
at Hardoi, he made any complaint/representation before
higher authorities regarding alleged denial of joining. It
was only after a long delay of more than 14 years he made
a representation before DRM, Moradabad on 11.04.2003
for alleged denial of joining to him. The workman has not
forwarded any explanation as to what prevented him to go
to the higher authorities immediately after 07.02.89 when
he was not allowed to join at Hardoi. No prudent man or
an employee who had put in more than 11 years’ services
will act like the workman has acted. He remained silent/
inactive up to 11.04.2003 for alleged injustice done to him.
Hence, the contention of the workman that he was not
allowed to join the duties, does not seems to be convincing.
14.
The management has pleaded that the case is stale
one and is suffering from vice of inordinate delay of 18
years on behalf of the workman, which is not explained by
the workman hence, the claim of the workman is liable to
be rejected. On the contrary the workman has pleaded
that the appropriate Government while referring the present
industrial dispute for adjudication has considered the
reasons of delay which was recited while conciliation
proceedings; and after considering the same it referred
the same to this Tribunal for adjudication. But no
explanation has been forwarded by the workman before
this Tribunal regarding delay either in making
representation before Railways or raising the industrial
dispute.
15.
Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Executive Engineer,
Public Works Department, Wardha vs. Namdeo Govindrao
Nandurkar, Wardha 2011 (129) FLR 1037, where the dispute
was raised after a delay of 11 years has observed as under:
“the Court cannot import the period of limitation
and the reference cannot be dismissed merely on
the ground of delay, it does not mean that
irrespective of the facts and circumstances of the
case, a stale claim must be entertained and the relief
should be granted. In case of delay, no formula of
universal application can be laid down and it would
depend upon the facts and circumstances of each
case. The Court dealing with the reference will have
to hold an enquiry and record it is finding on the
question whether the reference should be dismissed
on the ground of delay. In appropriate cases, the
court may mould the relief either by reducing the
back wages or by denying it completely. While
considering the question of delay, the Court will
have to be guided by certain principles, which are
culled out from various judgments of the Apex Court.
In the present case, the burden of proof was upon
the employee to show that the dispute was raised
with a reasonable time and to offer an explanation to
the satisfaction of the Court for the delay of 11 years
caused in seeking reference. Even on merits, no
evidence is placed on record to shift the onus upon
the employer. The reference was, therefore, stale
and was liable to be rejected on the sole ground.”
Further, Hon’ble Apex Court while dismissing the
writ petition (civil) No. 71 of 1992 between Ratan Chandra
Sammanta & Others vs. UoI & Others, where the casual
labourers of South Eastern Railway alleged to have been
appointed between 1968-69 and retrenched between 1975-78
6270
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
approached the Apex Court for a direction to the opposite
parties to give them re-employment, has observed as under:
“In absence of any fresh cause of action or any
legislation a person who has lost his remedy by
lapse of time before his right as well. From the date
of retrenchment if it is assumed to be correct a period
of more than 15 year has expired and in case we
accept the prayer of petitioner we would be depriving
a host of others who in the meantime have become
eligible and are entitled to claim to be employed.”
In Chennai Metropolitan Water Supply and
Sewerage Board & Others vs. T.T. Murali Babu 2014 (141)
FLR 772, Hon’ble Apex Court has observed as under :
“The Court should bear in mind that it is exercising
an extraordinary and equitable jurisdiction. As a
Constitutional Court it has a duty to protect the
rights of the citizens but simultaneously it is to keep
itself alive to the primary principle that when an
aggrieved person, without adequate reason,
approaches the Court at his own leisure or pleasure,
the Court would be under legal obligation to
scrutinize whether the lis at a belated stage should
be entertained or not. Be it noted, delay comes in
the way of equity. In certain circumstances delay
and laches may be fatal but in most circumstances
inordinate delay would only invite disaster for the
litigant who knocks at the doors of the Court. Delay
reflects inactivity and inaction on the part of a litigant
– a litigant who has forgotten the basic norms,
namely, “procrastination is the greatest thief of time”
and second, law does not permit one to sleep and
rise like a phoenix. Delay does bring a hazard and
causes injury to the lis. In the case at hand, though
there has been four years’ delay in approaching the
Court, yet the writ Court chose not to address the
same. It is the duty of the Court to scrutinize whether
such enormous delay is to be ignore without any
justification.”
14.
In view of facts and circumstances of the case and
legal positions cited above, it appears that the workman
never approached the railway authorities for his joining or
moved any representation to the higher authorities for
not allowing him to join his services at Hardoi within
reasonable time. It was only when his original application
was dismissed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, the
workman, moved a representation dated 11.04.2003 before
DRM, NR, Moradabad on the issue. The workman has
utterly failed to explain the delay of about more than 18
years, in raising the present industrial dispute and in my
opinion, on this basis the present reference cannot be
answered in favour of the workman, being his claim to be
highly stale one.
15.
Accordingly, I come to the conclusion that the
workman, Dwarika is not entitled to any relief.
16.
Award as above.
Lucknow
22nd July, 2014
Dr. MANJU NIGAM, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 8 flrEcj] 2014
dk-vk- 2470-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947
dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj Hkkjrh; LVsV
cSad ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp
vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd
vfèkdj.k] eqEcbZ ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 17@2011) dks izdkf'kr
djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 8@9@2014 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&12012@91@2010&vkbZvkj (ch&I)º
lqefr ldykuh] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh
New Delhi, the 8th September, 2014
S.O. 2470.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 17/2011)
of the Cent. Govt. Indus. Tribunal-cum-Labour Court No.
1, Mumbai as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial
dispute between the management of State Bank of India
and their workmen, received by the Central Government
on 08/09/2014.
[No. L-12012/91/2010-IR (B-I)]
SUMATI SAKLANI, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO. 1, MUMBAI
Present : Justice G. S. SARRAF, Presiding Officer
REFERENCE NO. CGIT-1/17 OF 2011
Parties : Employers in relation to the management of
State Bank of India
And
Their workman (Vilas D.Dhongde)
Appearances :
For the State Bank of India : Mr. Nadkarni, Adv.
For the workman
: Mr. Kumar Vaidyanathan,
Adv.
State : Maharashtra
Mumbai, dated the 20th day of June, 2013.
AWARD
This is a reference made by the Central Government
in exercise of its powers under clause (d) of sub-section
(1) and sub-section (2-A) of Section 10 of the Industrial
Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).
The terms of reference given in the schedule are as follows:
“Whether the action of the management of State
Bank of India, Region-IV, Pune in dismissing Shri
Vilas Dattu Dhongde from service with effect from
1.11.2009, is legal and justified? To what relief the
workman is entitled to?”
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6271
2.
According to the statement of claim filed by the
workman Vilas Dattu Dhongde he came to be employed as
a peon by State Bank of India (hereinafter referred to as
the Bank) at its Aswali branch on 12.1.2008. His last drawn
salary was Rs.3,460 p.m. He rendered service to the Bank
promptly and honestly from the date of his appointment
i.e. 12.1.2008 to the date of his termination i.e.1.11.2009.
The Bank illegally and wrongfully terminated his service
without following due process of law. The workman
completed 240 days of continuous service but he was
terminated in violation of the provisions of Section 25F of
the Act. He has, therefore, prayed that the Bank be directed
to reinstate him with full back wages and continuity of
service and other consequential benefits.
3.
According to the written statement filed by the Bank
the workman was engaged on ad-hoc basis and on daily
wage basis due to exigencies of the situation during the
period 12.1.2008 to 31.10.2009 and he was paid Rs.80 per
day and the amount was credited to his savings bank
account and maintained with the branch of the Bank. The
workman mainly worked as a canteen boy for serving tea
and coffee to staff members and sometimes he cleaned
the branch premises. On stray occasions, the services of
the workman might have been utilised for filling vouchers
etc. The workman was found untrustworthy. The workman
committed theft of registers and other documents of the
Bank and the Branch Manager filed a complaint against
the workman in the concerned Police Station on 2.6.2010.
The workman was also passing internal information of the
branch to the local people. The name of the workman was
not entered into the regular muster maintained at the
branch and the days on which he worked were recorded in
a kutcha register to ascertain the exact number of days for
which payment was required to be made to him. The
workman was merely engaged on casual basis and on daily
wages and he was disengaged when his services were not
needed. The Bank denied that the workman completed
240 days of continuous service in the Bank. The Bank
also stated that daily wagers were not entitled to the benefit
of Section 25-F of the Act. According to the written
statement the workman is not entitled to any relief.
4.
The workman has filed rejoinder wherein he has
reiterated his stand.
5.
The workman has filed his affidavit and he has been
cross examined by learned counsel for the Bank. The
Bank has filed affidavit of Ravindra Narayan Kapole who
has been cross examined by learned counsel for the
workman.
6.
Heard Mr.Kumar Vaidyanathan learned counsel for
the workman and Mr.Nadkarni learned counsel for the
Bank.
7.
Section 25-B of the Act defines continuous service.
In terms of sub-section (2) of Section 25-B if a workman
during a period of twelve calendar months preceding the
date with reference to which calculation is to be made has
actually worked under the employer for 240 days then he
will be deemed to be in continuous service. The burden of
proof is on the workman to show that he has worked for
240 days in preceding 12 months prior to his termination.
It is an admitted fact that the workman worked from
12.1.2008 to 31.10.2009. The workman has stated in his
affidavit that he completed more than 240 days of
continuous service in the Bank. In view of the above
statement of the workman the burden of proof shifted to
the Bank to prove that the workman did not complete 240
days of service in the requisite period because the workman
did not have access to the official documents, muster rolls
etc. in connection with his service. The Bank has not
produced any documentary evidence to prove that the
workman did not render continuous service for 240 days
in the requisite period. If the Bank, despite in possession
of the best evidence, does not produce the same then the
conclusion must go against the Bank. I am supported by
2009 III CLR 941. In this view of the matter I have come to
the conclusion that the workman has completed 240 days
of continuous service in the requisite period.
8.
The provisions contained in Section 25-F of the Act
are applicable even in a case of a daily wager. I am
supported by the judgement of Honourable Apex Court
reported in 2009 III CLR 941. It is not disputed that the
workman was terminated without complying with the
provisions of Section 25-F of the Act.
9.
It is thus clear from the above discussion that the
action of the Bank in dismissing the workman from service
is not justified as it is in violation of the provisions of
Section 25F of the Act.
10.
Now the question is that to what relief the workman
is entitled.
11.
The workman was a daily wager. His services were
terminated w.e.f.1.11.2009. In the facts and circumstance
of this matter the relief by way of reinstatement will be
wholly inappropriate. In my considered opinion
compensation instead of reinstatement will meet the ends
of justice.
12.
Looking to the length of service of the workman and
all other facts and circumstances of the matter. I have
come to the conclusion that a compensation of Rs.1,00,000
(one lakh) to the workman by the Bank will be appropriate
and will meet the ends of justice. The compensation be
paid within two months from today, failing which the same
will carry interest @ 9% p.a.
Award is passed accordingly.
Justice G. S. SARRAF, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 8 flrEcj] 2014
dk-vk- 2471-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947
dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj if'pe jsyos
6272
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp
vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd
vfèkdj.k la- 2] eqEcbZ ds iapkV (lanHkZ la- 10@2005) dks izdkf'kr
djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 8@9@2014 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&41012@93@2004&vkbZvkj (ch&I)º
lqefr ldykuh] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh
New Delhi, the 8th September, 2014
S.O. 2471.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No.10/2005)
of the Cent. Govt. Indus. Tribunal-cum-Labour Court No.
2, Mumbai as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial
dispute between the management of Western Railway
and their workmen, received by the Central Government
on 08/09/2014.
[No. L-41012/93/2004-IR (B-I)]
SUMATI SAKLANI, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO. 2, MUMBAI
PRESENT : K. B. KATAKE, Presiding Officer
REFERENCE NO. CGIT-2/10 of 2005
EMPLOYERS IN RELATION TO THE MANAGEMENT
OF WESTERN RAILWAY
The Divisional Railway Manager (E),
Western Railway, Mumbai Division,
Mumbai Central
Mumbai-400 008.
AND
THEIR WORKMEN.
The President,
Indian Railway Technical Staff Association
2, Mahabir Yadav Chawl
Nagardas Road, Andheri (E)
Mumbai-400 058.
APPEARANCES :
FOR THE EMPLOYER :
Ms. Jyoti U. Panwalkar,
Advocate.
FOR THE WORKMEN :
Mr. M. B. Anchan, Advocate.
Mumbai, dated the 21st July, 2014.
AWARD PART-I
The Government of India, Ministry of Labour &
Employment by its Order No.L-41012/93/2004-IR (B-I),
dated 21.10.2004 in exercise of the powers conferred by
clause (d) of sub-section (1) and sub-section 2(A) of
Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 have referred
the following industrial dispute to this Tribunal for
adjudication:
“Whether the action of the management of Western
Railway Administration viz DRM, Western Railway,
Mumbai Division, Mumbai in dismissing the services
of Shri Lalta Prasad is justified? If not, what relief
Shri Lalta Prasad is entitled to?”
1.
After receipt of the reference, notices were issued
to both the parties. In response to the notice, the second
party Union filed its statement of claim at Ex-9. According
to them the workman Shri Lalta Prasad working as a
Pointsman under the Station Superintendent, Western
Railway, Mumbai Central Mumbai. He had proceeded on
10 days sanctioned leave from 8/7/1984 to 17/7/1994 and
went to his native place. At his native place he was taken
ill and was suffering from mental depression and was taking
treatment from Doctor Aslam. As his condition was
deteriorating, his wife brought him back to Mumbai and
admitted him in Jagjivan Ram Railway Hospital, Mumbai
Central. From his native place the workman had informed
the office by telephone and had also written a letter to his
office about his illness. After coming to Mumbai again he
had informed his office by telephone about his illness. On
26/9/1994 he had also sent a registered letter and requested
for extension of his leave till his recovery. He was under
treatment upto 23/09/1996.
2.
On 23/9/1996 he resumed his duties with fitness
certificate. Since then he worked till the date of his removal
i.e. till 07/12/1997. The workman was served with a charge
sheet dt. 18/11/1996 for the alleged misconduct that he
remained unauthorisedly absent from 18/7/1994 to
23/09/1996. He was also charged for not informing to the
office the reasons regarding his absence from 18/07/1994
to 23/09/1996 and did not get his leave sanctioned from
competent authority on proper medical ground and did
not observe proper rule for obtaining leave. The inquiry
was against the principles of natural justice. The Inquiry
Office did not explain to the workman the procedure of
departmental inquiry neither asked him to submit his
explanation to the charge sheet. He was also not asked to
bring defence representative. He was not given the copy
of leave record. The workman was not acquainted with
English. The I.O. recorded the proceeding in English and
closed the inquiry. The I.O. did not give opportunity to
submit his written brief. The inquiry was not fair and
proper. The findings of the I.O. are perverse. On the basis
of report of the I.O., the disciplinary authority of first party
terminated the services of the workman. His appeal was
also dismissed illegally.
3.
The workman therefore raised industrial dispute
before ALC. As conciliation failed on the report of ALC,
the Central Labour Ministry has sent the reference to this
Tribunal. The workman therefore prays that the inquiry
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6273
be declared not fair and proper and findings of the I.O. be
declared perverse. The order of first party terminating the
service of the workman be set aside and the workman be
reinstated in service with full back wages.
4.
The first party Management resisted the statement
of claim vide its written statement at Ex-10. According to
them, the workman was working as Pointsman with the
Railway Administration. The category of Pointsman is
declared as Safety Category Post as per the extent rules.
A person appointed on the safety category post is imparted
with the field training related with the safety of the train
operations. As such workman is required to work with the
Station Master. Once a technical person is allotted or
posted on a particular station, the said work cannot be
assigned to another untrained person and if the trained
person is remaining absent the functioning of railway
working would affect tremendously. The workman
despites working as Pointsman remained absent without
following due procedure of leave for a long period of 799
days from 08/07/1994 to 23/09/1996. He never bothered to
see that he should be punctual in his attendance. The
workman was imposed penalty of removal from service
after following the procedure under R.S. (D & A) 1966 and
his appeal as well as revision application have been
dismissed by the Competent and Revisionary Authority.
5.
The workman had never given any application to
the management for extension of leave. There was no
intimation about his sickness and workman failed to
observe proper medical rules for taking leave on the ground
of sickness. Therefore workman was charge sheeted and
Inquiry Officer was appointed. The Inquiry Officer has
explained the charges to the workman. He examined the
witnesses of the management in presence of the workman.
Workman was given full opportunity to cross-examine the
witnesses of management. Copies of all the papers relied
upon were supplied to the workman. Workman cross-
examined the witnesses of management. Opportunity was
also given to the workman to lead his evidence, oral and
documentary and after hearing him and after following the
procedure, Inquiry Officer has submitted his report. Copy
of the report was sent to the workman. After giving him
hearing, the disciplinary authority has awarded the
punishment of termination, which is quite just and proper.
The inquiry was fair and proper. The findings of the I.O.
are based on the evidence on record and the punishment
of termination was proportionate to the proved
misconduct. Therefore the first party prays that reference
be dismissed with cost.
6.
The second party workman filed his rejoinder vide
Ex-12. He denied all the allegations in the written statement
and reiterated the contents in his statement of claim.
7.
Following are the preliminary issues for my
determination. I record my findings thereon for the reasons
to follow:
Sr. No. Issues
Findings
1.
Whether the inquiry is fair and
Yes.
proper?
2.
Whether the findings of the
No.
Inquiry Officer are perverse?
3.
What order?
As per
final order.
REASONS
Issue No. 1 :—
8.
In this respect the ld. adv. for the second party
submitted that the Inquiry Officer did not explain the
procedure of departmental inquiry to the workman. The
second objection is that the I.O. did not ask the workman
to appoint defence representative. Another objection is
that the first party did not produce the leave record of the
workman in the inquiry. The last objection of second party
is that the I.O. recorded the inquiry proceeding in English.
9.
The ld. adv. for the first party submitted that the
workman was served with charge sheet dt. 18/11/1996 and
domestic inquiry was initiated against him in which he
had participated. The I.O. has conducted the inquiry as
per the principles of natural justice. The second party
was given full and fair opportunity to defend himself. He
was given opportunity to cross-examine the management
witness and also permitted to adduce his evidence in the
inquiry. He was given the copies of the documents filed in
the inquiry proceeding by the first party and also allowed
to file his documents. The I.O. conducted the inquiry in
Hindi and recorded the proceedings partly in Hindi and
partly in English. The copy of Report and findings of I.O.
was sent to the workman before his dismissal.
10.
In this respect the ld. adv. for the first party pointed
out that the workman in his cross-examination (Ex- 17),
has admitted that he participated in the inquiry and the
charges were explained by the Inquiry Officer and he
understood the same. He also admitted that he did not
bring his defence representative in spite of declaration to
that effect by the first party. He also admitted that the
inquiry proceedings were recorded in his presence and
that the evidence of management witnesses was also
recorded in his presence. He further admitted in his cross
that he has cross-examined the management witnesses
and the management had offered inspection of the
documents produced in the inquiry proceeding.
11.
In this backdrop the ld. adv. for the first party
submitted that the I.O. has conducted the inquiry as per
the principles of natural justice and as per the procedure
prescribed therefor. In support of his argument the ld.
adv. resorted to Apex Court ruling in Sur Enamel and
Stamping Works Ltd. V/s. Their Workmen 1950-1967 SCLJ
1466 SC wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court laid down the
6274
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
following conditions for fair and proper domestic inquiry.
They are:
(1)
The employee proceeded against has been informed
clearly of the charges leveled against him.
(2)
The witnesses are examined-ordinarily in the
presence of the employee in respect of the charges
(3)
The employee is given a fair opportunity to cross
examine witnesses.
(4)
He is given a fair opportunity to examine witnesses
including himself in his defence if he so wishes on
any relevant matter and
(5)
The Inquiry Officer records his findings with reasons
for the same in his report.
12.
In the light of guidelines of the Apex Court all the
points were complied with by the Inquiry Officer i.e. the
inquiry was conducted in presence of the workman. Copies
of all the documents produced in the inquiry proceeding
were given to him. He was given opportunity to cross
examine the management witnesses. The ld. adv. for the
workman has further submitted that, management neither
produced the leave record of the workman nor given copies
thereof to him. On the point it is rightly submitted on
behalf of the first party that, the fact is not disputed that
the workman was unauthorisedly absent from 18/07/1994
to 23/09/1996. Neither there was dispute of balance leave
nor leave account was necessary in the inquiry proceeding.
Therefore question of producing leave record or giving
copies thereof to the workman does not arise. The fact is
not disputed that copies of all the documents produced in
the inquiry proceeding were supplied to the workman.
13.
In respect of recording of proceeding in English it
was rightly pointed out by the ld. adv. for the first party
that the inquiry was conducted in Hindi, the language
known to the workman and the proceeding thereof was
recorded in English. Therefore it cannot be called illegal
or improper. On the point Bombay High Court ruling can
be resorted to in National Organic Chemicals Ltd. & Ors.
V/s. Pandit Ladaku Patil 2008 III CLR 716 wherein the
inquiry was conducted in Marathi and the evidence was
recorded in English. The Hon’ble Court held that, the
inquiry cannot be quashed for following such a procedure
of recording evidence in English. In the circumstances I
come to the conclusion that the inquiry was fair and proper.
Accordingly I decide this issue No.1 in the affirmative.
Issue No. 2 :—
14.
In respect of the findings of the Inquiry Officer it is
vaguely contended that they are perverse. However details
thereof are not given as to how they are perverse. On the
other hand the findings of the I.O. are found to be in
consonance with the evidence on record i.e. the workman
was absent from 18/7/1994 to 23/09/1996 and neither he
had obtained leave nor applied therefor. In short findings
are based on the evidence on record. Thus I hold that the
findings of the I.O. are not perverse. Accordingly I decide
this issue No. 2 in the negative and proceed to pass the
following order:
ORDER
(i)
The inquiry is held fair and proper.
(ii)
Findings of the Inquiry Officer are not perverse.
(iii)
The parties are directed to argue/lead evidence on
the point of quantum of punishment.
Date: 21/07/2014
K. B. KATAKE, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 9 flrEcj] 2014
dk-vk- 2472-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947
dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj fMikVZesaV vkWiQ
VsyhdE;wfuds'ku ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa
ds chp vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj
vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k@Je U;k;ky;] tcyiqj ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k
lhthvkbZVh@ ,ylh@vkj@337@99) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh;
ljdkj dks 8@9@2014 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&40012@278@99&vkbZvkj (Mh;w)º
ih- osQ- os.kqxksiky] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh
New Delhi, the 9th September, 2014
S.O. 2472.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (I.D. No. CGIT/
LC/R/337/99) of the Central Government Industrial
Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Jabalpur now as shown in
the Annexure, in the Industrial Dispute between the
employers in relation to the management of the Department
of Telecommunication and their workmean, which was
received by the Central Government on 08/09/2014.
[No. L-40012/278/99-IR (DU)]
P. K. VENUGOPAL, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRLAL TRLBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,
JABALPUR
NO. CGIT/LC/R/337/99
PRESIDING OFFICER : SHRI R. B. PATLE
Shri Jagdishchandra Rathore,
S/o Aathmaram Rathore,
Vill. Nenavath,
Tehsil Tarana,
Distt. Ujjain
.....Workman
Versus
Chief General Manager,
Deptt. of Telecommunication,
Hoshangabad Road,
MP Circle,
Bhopal (MP)
.....Management
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6275
AWARD
Passed on this 22nd day of August, 2014
1.
As per letter dated 19-11-99 by the Government of
India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi, the reference is
received. The reference is made to this Tribunal under
Section-10 of I.D. Act, 1947 as per Notification
No. L-40012/278/99-IR(DU) The dispute under reference
relates to :
“Whether the action of the management of Chief
General Manager Telecom and their workman Shri
Jagdishchandra Rathore S/o Aathmaram Rathore
w.e.f. 26-3-99 is legal and justified? If not, to what
relief the workman is entitled?”
2.
After receiving reference, notices were issued to the
parties. 1st party workman submitted statement of claim at
Page 2/1 to 2/4. Case of workman is that he was engaged as
labour by IInd party No. 4 from November, 1989. IInd party
No. 3 is authority for sanctioning payment of salary and
allowances. IInd party No. 2 is controlling authority. IInd
No. 1 is implementing the policy. Workman was engaged
as casual labour as large number of casual labours were
engaged by IInd party on daily wages. Their services were
not regularized. Petition was filed in statement of claim.
Hon’ble Apex Court had given directions for framing
scheme for regularization for casual employees. It is
submitted that workman was continuously working from
7-11-1989 as his services were not regularized as per scheme
for regularization of casual employees, the casual employee
working as on 30-3-85 was entitled for regularization of his
services. Workman was not given its benefit. His services
were terminated on 31-3-99 without any notice or without
paying retrenchment compensation, termination of his
service is in violation of Section 25 of I.D. Act. Workman
had completed 240 days continuous service. Oral
termination of his services is illegal. That workman was
paid Rs. 1500 per month. He was not paid regular pay scale.
IInd party exploited workman. On such ground workman is
praying for his regularization and reinstatement with
consequential benefits.
3.
IInd party initially filed written Statement at Page 3/1
to 3/2 signed only by the counsel for management. Written
Statement duly verified is filed by management on 22-3-13.
Claim of workman is totally denied. As per management.
Workman was not appointed as casual labour from
November, 1989 by Sub-Divisional Engineer. That workman
did not work with IInd party. There was no question of
termination of his service. There was no question of issuing
notice or payment of retrenchment compensation. Workman
not worked for 240 days in any of the calendar years. There
was no question of retrenchment of his service. Workman
never worked in the Sub-division. There was no question
of regularization of his service. On such ground, IInd party
prays that reference is answered in favour of management.
4.
Considering pleadings on record, the points which
arise for my consideration and determination are as under.
My findings are recorded against each of them for the
reasons as below :—
(i)
Whether the action of the manage-
In Negative
ment of Chief General
Manager Telecom and their work-
man Shri Jagdishchandra Rathore
S/o Aathmaram Rathore w.e.f. 26-3-99
is legal and justified?
(ii) If not, what relief the
As per final
workman is entitled to?”
order.
REASONS
5.
Terms of reference relates to action taken by
management against workman from 26-3-99, some word is
missing. In his statement of claim, workman has pleaded
that his services were terminated by IInd party from 31-3-
99. IInd party had denied all material contentions of
workman. Workman filed affidavit of his evidence
contending that his services were terminated in 1999. He
was not paid retrenchment compensation. He was
continuously working 1987 to 1999. He completed 240 days
continuous service. His services were terminated in
violation of Section 25 H, G of I.D.Act. In his cross-
examination, workman says his affidavit is drafted in English
and not in Hindi. Some mistake was committed. He has
stated in his affidavit that he was working till 1998 again
says 1999 . Workman again corrected that he was working
with Ilnd party till 1990. Management’s witness Deewakar
Jain in his affidavit of evidence says that as per record
available workman was never engaged by management.
The claim for regularization of workman is baseless. In his
cross-examination, management’s witness says that at
Sohagpur office, record of casual mazdoor was maintained.
Again he corrected that he doesnot know whether record
of casual mazdoor was maintained in said office.
Management’s witness in his further cross-examination
says he doesnot know whether at the time in question,
casual mazdoors were engaged by the department of IInd
party. The witness of management is working on the post
of SDE Legal. He looks after cases of the department. He
has no knowledge of casual labours engaged in department
during 1990 to 1991.
6.
1st party had given application for production of
documents dated 26-6-03. IInd party did not produce
documents as per said application. Despite of time
requested for production of documents, as per the orders,
the evidence of workman and management’s witness is
carefully appreciated. Management’s witness has no
knowledge about casual employees engaged in the
department. On application submitted by workman for
production of documents, the documents are not produced
by management. The material documents are withheld by
6276
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
the management. Under such set of facts, the evidence of
workman deserves to be accepted instead of the evidence
of management’s witness. The evidence of workman is clear
that his services were terminated without notice, he was
not paid retrenchment, he was continuously working since
November 1989 till 31-3-99. Therefore termination of service
of workman is illegal. For above reasons, I record my finding
in Point No.l in Negative.
7.
Point No.2- In view of my finding in Point No.l,
termination of service of workman is in violation of Section
25-F of I.D. Act, question arises whether workman is entitled
for reinstatement. As per pleadings of the workman, he
was not working in 1985 therefore workman is not entitled
for benefits of scheme for regularization of casual
employees. Considering length of service rendered by
workman reasonable compensation deserves to be
awarded. Compensation Rs. One Lakh would be
reasonable. Accordingly I record my finding in Point No. l.
8.
In the result, award is passed as under:-
(1)
The action of the management of Chief Geneal
Manager Telecom and their workman Shri
Jagdishchandra Rathore S/o Aathmaram Rathore
w.e.f. 26-3-99 is not legal.
(2)
IInd party is directed to pay compensation Rs. One
Lakh to the workman within 30 days from the date of
publication of award.
Amount as per above order shall be paid to workman
within 30 days from the date of notification of award. In
case of default, amount shall carry 9% interest per annum
from the date of award till its realization.
R. B. PATLE, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 9 flrEcj] 2014
dk-vk- 2473-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947
dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj fMikVZesaV vkWiQ
VsyhdE;wfuds'ku ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa
ds chp vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj
vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k ,oa Je U;k;ky;] tcyiqj ds iapkV (lanHkZ
la[;k lhthvkbZVh@ ,ylh@vkj@192@93) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks
dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 8@9@2014 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&40012@80@92&vkbZvkj (Mh;w)º
ih- osQ- os.kqxksiky] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh
New Delhi, the 9th September, 2014
S.O. 2473.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (I.D. No. CGIT/
LC/R/192/93) of the Central Government Industrial
Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Jabalpur now as shown in
the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the
employers in relation to the management of Department
of Telecommunication and their workman, which was
received by the Central Government on 08/09/2014.
[No. L-40012/80/92-IR (DU)]
P. K. VENUGOPAL, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,
JABALPUR
NO. CGIT/LC/R/192/93
PRESIDING OFFICER : SHRI R. B. PATLE
Shri Beduram,
S/o Shri Tanguram,
Sakin Pandaria,
Tehsil Takhatpur,
Distt. Bilaspur
.....Workman
Versus
Divisional Officer (Telegraphs),
Department of Telecommunication,
PO & Distt. Bilaspur
.....Management
AWARD
Passed on this 14th day of August, 2014
1.
As per letter dated 17-9-93 by the Government of
India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi, the reference is
received. The reference is made to this Tribunal under
Section -10 of I.D.Act, 1947 as per Notification No.L-40012/
80/92-IR(DU). The dispute under reference relates to:
“Whether the action of the management of SDO
(Telegraphs) Bilaspur in retrenching Shri Bedu Ram,
S/o Shri Tangu Ram w.e.f.10-10-90 is justified? If not,
to what relief he is entitled to?”
2.
After receiving reference, notices were issued to
the parties. Workman submitted statement of claim at page
2/1 to 2/3. Case of workman is that he was employed with
IInd party from 17-9-81 to 15-10-90. He was continuously
working as casual labour. His services were terminated
without enquiry. He further submits that termination of
his service was on the ground of unauthorized officers for
more than six months i.e. January, 1985 to May, 1988 the
period of 3 years 6 months. One month’s notice pay Rs.1035
and Rs.517 as retrenchment compensation were paid.
Workman further submits that DO letter of General
Manager dated 12-1-90 is clear that workman completed
240 days continuous service becomes ordinary mazdoor/
confirmed. The reasons assigned in termination order is
not sustainable. Workman was not absent. He was working
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6277
with IInd party. Workman instead of regularization was
terminated from service. That termination of his service is
in violation of Section 25-H of I.D. Act and the provisions
of Contract Labour (R&A)Act 1970. On such ground,
workman is praying for reinstatement with consequential
benefits.
3.
Further statement of claim is submitted by workman
at Page 6/1 to 6/2 reiterating his contentions about his
appointment, that provisions of Section 25 N are applicable.
4.
IInd party filed Written Statement at Page 9/1 to 9/3.
Relief claimed by workman is denied. IInd party has shown
working days of workman from 1981 to 1990, 1991. It is
submitted that the workman did not worked continuously.
He remained unauthorized absent therefore one month’s
pay was paid to him in lieu of notice and his services were
dispensed with.
5.
It is reiterated that for unauthorised absence from
duty, services of workman were dispensed. Workman did
not continuously worked for 240 days during 1989-90.
Workman cannot claim status of regular employee. That
the workman was engaged purely on temporary basis. He
is not entitled to the relief claimed by him. There was no
question of giving artificial break to the workman.
6.
Considering pleadings on record, the points which
arise for my consideration and determination are as under.
My findings are recorded against each of them for the
reasons as below:-
(i)
Whether the action of the manage-
In Affirmative
ment of SDO(Telegraphs) Bilaspur
in retrenching Shri Bedu Ram,
S/o Shri Tangu Ram w.e.f.10-10-90
is justified?
(ii) If not, what relief the workman is
Workman is not
entitled to?”
entitled to any
relief.
REASONS
7.
Workman is challenging termination of his service
on the ground that he was terminated for unauthorized
absence without holding enquiry. He was paid one months
pay and retrenchment compensation.
8.
Workman filed affidavit of his evidence covering
above contentions in statement of claim. However workman
failed to appear for his cross-examination. Evidence of
workman was closed on 24-8-09. As workman failed to
appear for his cross-examination, his evidence cannot be
accepted.
9.
Management filed affidavit of witness Shri I.S.Xalxo
supporting contentions of management. Evidence of
management’s witness remained unchallenged. Workman
failed to cross-examine the management’s witness.
evidence of workman cannot be accepted as he failed to
appear for cross-examination. Evidence of management’s
witness remained unchallenged. I find no reason to discard
his evidence therefore the contentions of workman cannot
be accepted. For above reasons, I record my finding in
Point No.1 in Affirmative.
10.
In the result, award is passed as under :—
(1)
The action of the management of SDO(Telegraphs)
Bilaspur in retrenching Shri Bedu Ram, S/o Shri Tangu
Ram w.e.f.10-10-90 is proper and legal.
(2)
Workman is not entitled to any relief.
R. B. PATLE, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 9 flrEcj] 2014
dk-vk- 2474-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947
dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj fMikVZesaV vkWiQ
VsyhdE;wfuds'ku ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa
ds chp vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj
vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k] tcyiqj ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k lhthvkbZVh@
,ylh@vkj@102@05) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks
8@9@2014 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&40012@45@2005&vkbZvkj (Mh;w)º
ih- osQ- os.kqxksiky] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh
New Delhi, the 9th September, 2014
S.O. 2474.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (I.D. No. CGIT/
LC/R/102/05) of the Central Government Industrial
Tribunal cum Labour Court, Jabalpur now as shown in the
Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers
in relation to the management of Department of
Telecommunication and their workmen, which was received
by the Central Government on 08/09/2014.
[No. L-40012/45/2005-IR (DU)]
P. K. VENUGOPAL, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT,
JABALPUR
NO. CGIT/LC/R/102/05
PRESIDING OFFICER : SHRI R. B. PATLE
Shri Rakesh Patel,
S/o Shri Pyarelal Patel,
Telephone Exchange,
Shahdol
.....Workman
Versus
Chief General Manager,
Deptt. of Telecommunication,
BSNL Hoshangabad, MP Circle,
Bhopal (MP)
.....Management
6278
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
AWARD
Passed on this 1st day of August 2014
1.
As per letter dated 26-9-05 by the Government of
India, Ministry Labour, New Delhi, the reference is received.
The reference is made to this Tribunal under Section -10 of
I.D. Act, 1947 as per Notification No.L-40012/45/2005-
IR(DU). The dispute under reference relates to :
“Whether the action of the TDE, Telecom, Mandla
in terminating the services of Shri Rakesh Kumar
Patel instead of regularizing him (as he completed
240 days) and not complying provisions of Industrial
Dispute Act, 1947 is legal and justified? If not, to
what relief the concerned workman is entitled?”
2.
After receiving reference, notices were issued to the
parties. 1st party workman submitted his statement of claim.
Case of 1st party workman is that he was initially appointed
on 1-6-85 by IInd party. He continuously worked till
1-12-1990. It is submitted that instead of regularizing his
services, IInd party arbitrarily terminated his services from
1-12-90. That workman had completed 240 days continuous
service. His termination without assigning reason amounts
to retrenchment under Section 2(oo) of I.D.Act. His services
are terminated in violation of Section 25-F of I.D.Act is
illegal. Workman submits that from 1-6-85 to 1-12-90, he
was continuously working. He acquired status of employee
under Section 25 B of I.D. Act. It is reiterated that his services
are terminated without notice, without paying retrenchment
compensation in violation of Section 25 of I.D. Act. On
such ground, he prays for reinstatement with back wages.
3.
IInd party filed Written Statement opposing claim of
workman. IInd party submits that workman has not
completed 240 days. His name is not recorded in muster
roll. Management did not appoint workman. There was no
question of his regularization or termination. It is reiterated
that as workman has not completed 240 days continuous
service, there was no question of violation of provisions
of I.D.Act. Workman is not covered under Section 25 B of
I.D.Act, the contentions of workman are false. Workman
doesot come within the aspect and scheme of judgment of
Supreme Court dated 27-10-87. On such ground, IInd party
prays for rejection of claim.
4.
Considering pleadings on record, the points which
arise for my consideration and determination are as under.
My findings are recorded against each of them for the
reasons as below :
(i)
Whether the action of the TDE,
In Affirmative
Telecom, Mandla in terminating
the services of Shri Rakesh Kumar
Patel instead of regularizing him
(as he completed 240 days) and
not complying provisions of
Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 is
legal and justified?
(ii) If not, what relief the workman is
Workman is not
entitled to?”
entitled to any
relief.
REASONS
5 .
Workman is challenging termination of his service
for violation of Section 25-F of I.D. Act contending that he
completed 240 days continuous service. In support of his
claim, workman filed affidavit. However he failed to appear
for his cross-examination. Evidence of workman was closed
on 3-8-2012.
6.
Management filed affidavit of evidence of witness
Shri A.K. Sahu. workman failed to participate and cross-
examine the witness of management. Thus the claim of
workman is not supported by evidence. Evidence of
management’s witness remained unchallenged, I find no
reason to discard his evidence.
7.
Learned counsel for workman relies on ratio held in
case of Shamsuddin versus State of MP reported in 2007(III)
MPWN 111. In case of Batala Coop. sugar Mills Ltd. Versus
Sowaran Singh reported in 2005(8) Supreme Court Cases
481. In fact the claim of Ist party is supported by evidence,
detailed discussion of ratio held in all those cases is not
necessary. For absence of evidence, I record my finding in
Point No.1 in Affirmative.
8.
In the result, award is passed as under:-
(1)
The action of the TDE, Telecom, Mandla in
terminating the services of Shri Rakesh Kumar Patel
instead of regularizing him is legal and proper.
(2)
Workman is not entitled to any relief.
R. B. PATLE, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 9 flrEcj] 2014
dk-vk- 2475-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947
dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vflLVsaV
lqifjUVsUMsUV] VsyhxzkiQ VªSfiQd] fcykliqj izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa
vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa
dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k tcyiqj ds iapkV (lanHkZ
la[;k lhthvkbZVh@ ,ylh@vkj@142@93) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks
dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 8@9@2014 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&40012@122@92&vkbZvkj (Mh;w)º
ih- osQ- os.kqxksiky] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh
New Delhi, the 9th September, 2014
S.O. 2475.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (I.D. No. CGIT/
LC/R/142/93) of the Central Government Industrial
Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Jabalpur now as shown in
the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the
employers in relation to the management of Asstt. Suptd.,
Telegraph Traffic, Bilaspur and their workmen, received
by the Central Government on 08/09/2014.
[No. L-40012/122/92-IR (DU)]
P. K. VENUGOPAL, Section Officer
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6279
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,
JABALPUR
NO. CGIT/LC/R/142/93
PRESIDING OFFICER : SHRI R .B. PATLE
Shri Itwari Prasad Gond,
C/o Shri Shivlal Gond,
Gram. Kisan Parsada,
Post Jhairam Nagar,
Distt. Bilaspur
....Workman
Versus
Asstt. Suptd.,
Telegraph Traffic,
D.F.O.
PO & Distt. Bilaspur
.....Management
AWARD
Passed on this 30th day of July 2014
1.
As per letter dated 21-7-93 by the Government of
India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi, the reference is
received. The reference is made to this Tribunal under
Section -10 of I.D.Act, 1947 as per Notification No.L-40012/
122/92-IRDU. The dispute under reference relates to:
“Whether the action of the management of Asstt.
Suptd. Telegraph Traffic, DTO Bilaspur in
terminating the services of Shri Itwari Prasad Gond,
S/o Shri shivlal Gond w.e.f. 7-8-90 is justified? If not,
what relief he is entitled to?”
2.
After receiving reference, notices were issued to
the parties. Workman submitted statement of claim at Page
3/1 to 3/2. Case of workman is that he was appointed as
telegraph man in Telegraph office, Bilaspur. On 13-2-85, he
was continuously working in D.T.O, Bilaspur upto 7-8-90.
He was terminated without notice. He was not paid
retrenchment compensation. He had worked 125 days in
1985, 337 days in 1986, 336 days in 1987, 317 days in 1988,
349 days in 1989, 223 days in 1990 & 103 days in 1991.
Workman submits that termination of his service is in
violation of Section 25-F of I.D.Act. On such ground, he
prays for reinstatement with back wages.
3.
IInd party filed Written Statement at Page 6/1 to 6/2.
IInd party submits that workman has not depicted correct
picture. The false ground are shown. Workman was
employed as casual labour who could be given the work
of telegraph in absence of telegraph man or delivery man,
if such work was available. He was paid wages Rs. 28.25
per day. It is denied that as per instructions dated 12-1-90,
it was not possible to provide status of casual labour to
the Ist party. The working days is shown in statement of
claim of Ist party during 1985 to 1991. It is admitted to be
correct. IInd party however denies that termination of his
service is in violation of Section 25-F of I.D. Act. IInd
party prays for rejection of claim.
4.
Workman filed rejoinder at Page 7/1 to 7/3 reiterating
its contentions in statement of claim. That he was
discharging work of telegraph man and not as casual
labour. Workman was delivering telegram and he was
assured monthly salaries. He continuously worked during
1985 to 1991. His services are terminated without notice.
Workman prays for his reinstatement.
5.
Considering pleadings on record, the points which
arise for my consideration and determination are as under.
My findings are recorded against each of them for the
reasons as below:-
(i)
Whether the action of the manage-
In Negative
ment of Whether the action of the
management of Asstt. Suptd. Telegraph
Traffic, DTO Bilaspur in terminating the
services of Shri Itwari Prasad Gond,
S/o Shri shivlal Gond w.e.f. 7-8-90 is
justified?
(ii) If not, what relief the workman is
As per final
entitled to?”
order.
REASONS
6.
Workman is challenging termination of his service
from 7-8-90 for violation of Section 25-F. that he was
continuously working from 1985 to 1991. The working days
given in para-3 of statement of claim are admitted by IInd
party. Workman filed affidavit of his evidence. The working
days are shown in para-3 of affidavit. Working days of
workman during 1986 to 1989 are shown more than 240
days. The services of workman were terminated without
notice. The documents Exhibit W-4 shows workman was
continuously working from 1-8-85 to 1-1-1990 without any
break. Thus the evidence of workman is supported that he
completed more than 240 days continuous service during
above period. In his cross-examination, workman denies
that he was engaged as casual labour. He also denies that
after appointment of permanent employee, his services
were terminated. The evidence of management’s witness
Shri M.R. Dhurv is on the point that workman was engaged
on casual basis as deliveryman in absence of permanent
incumbent on wages Rs. 28.25 per day. Workman had not
completed 240 days continuous service. Management’s
witness in his cross-examination says as per the
department’s letter he says that workman was engaged as
casual labour. Said letter is produced on record. Letter
was issued by Shri R.P.Srivastava, Divisional Engineer
Exhibit M-1. Management’s witness further says that
any document was not found , that workman worked for
more than 240 days during an year. When working days
are admitted in Written Statement filed by workman, the
evidence of management’s witness contrary to it cannot
be accepted. The evidence shows workman worked more
6280
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
than 240 days during 1985 to 1990. His services were
terminated without notice in violation of section 25-F of
I.D.Act. Therefore I record my finding in Point No.1 in
Negative.
7.
Point No. 2 Termination of workman is in violation
of Section 25-F of I.D.Act. his services were terminated
long back in 1991. Workman was working since 1985 to
1991. Considering length of service, workman cannot be
allowed reinstatement with full back wages. Termination
in violation of Section 25-F would justify reasonable
compensation to the workman. In my considered view,
compensation Rs.1,50,000/- would be appropriate in the
matter. Accordingly I record my finding in Point No.2.
8.
In the result, award is passed as under:-
(1)
The action of the management of Asstt. Suptd.
Telegraph Traffic, DTO Bilaspur in terminating the
services of Shri Itwari Prasad Gond, S/o Shri shivlal
Gond w.e.f. 7-8-90 is proper and legal.
(2)
IInd party is directed to pay compensation
Rs.1,50,000/- to the workman Shri Itwari Prasad Gond.
Amount as per above order shall be paid to workman
within 30 days from the date of notification of award. In
case of default, amount shall carry 9 % interest per annum
from the date of award till its realization.
R. B. PATLE, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 9 flrEcj] 2014
dk-vk- 2476-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947
dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj xu dSfjt
iSQDVªh] tcyiqj ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa
ds chp vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj
vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k tcyiqj ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k lhthvkbZVh@
,ylh@vkj@39@90) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks
8@9@2014 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&14012@19@89&Mh&2 (ch)º
ih- osQ- os.kqxksiky] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh
New Delhi, the 9th September, 2014
S.O. 2476.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (I.D. No. CGIT/
LC/R/39/90) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-
cum-Labour Court, Jabalpur now as shown in the Annexure
in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation
to the management of Gun Carriage Factory, Jabalpur and
their workmen, received by the Central Government on
08/09/2014.
[No. L-14012/19/89-D-2 (B)]
P. K. VENUGOPAL, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,
JABALPUR
NO. CGIT/LC/R/39/90
PRESIDING OFFICER : SHRI R. B. PATLE
Shri K.Dutta,
Vice President,
GCF Labour Union,
Q.No.489, Byoharbagh,
Jabalpur (MP)
.....Workman
Versus
General Manager,
Gun Carriage Factory,
Jabalpur
....Management
AWARD
Passed on this 30th day of July 2014
1.
As per letter dated 31-1-90 by the Government of
India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi, the reference is
received. The reference is made to this Tribunal under
Section -10 of I.D.Act, 1947 as per Notification No.L-14012/
19/89-D-2(B). The dispute under reference relates to:
“Whether the action of the management of Gun
Carriage Factory, Jabalpur in compulsory retiring
Shri K.Dutta, Ex.Labour, GCF w.e.f. 21-1-1988 is legal
and justified? If not, to what relief the workman is
entitled to?”
2.
After receiving reference, notices were issued to
the parties. Ist party workman filed statement of claim at
Page 3/1 to 3/11. Case of workman is that the penalty of
removal from service by Chairman Ordnance Factory,
Calcutta modified to compulsory retirement as per order
dated 22-1-88 is illegal. Workman submits details of his
service. He was selected as Artisan Training in the year
1963. After 4 ½ years training including one year journey
manship at Gun and Shell Factory, he was appointed as
Turner A Grade. In 1968 he was transferred to GCF by the
Director General, Ordnance Factory, Calcutta. In 1973, he
was promoted on the post of Supervisor Grade B. workman
further submits that he was active member of Trade Union
during 1971 to 1974. Workman was President, General
Secretary of union, GCF Mazdoor Sangh. Union was
holding majority of seats in Committee during 1974 to 1978,
1980 during his tenure. That he raised grievances of the
employees in the matters of work system, promotion policy
activities, corruption etc. suddenly he was transferred to
Abadi, Madras in 1977. He also submits that he was placed
under suspension on false charges. The suspension was
continued for 20 months even after completion of enquiry.
Workman says that he was victimized by the management.
Because of his Union activities, he was suspended time to
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6281
time by General Manager Shri Narashhimhan. That in
August 1981 at instance of General Manager Shri
Narashhimhan, new General Manager directed to issue
chargesheet against him on fabricated charges. That the
charges pertained to LTC advance in 1974. Chargesheet
was issued after more than 7 years. It suffered from latches.
Even after issuing chargesheet, enquiry was conducted
after 5 years diminishing the chance of defence.
Departmental enquiry was started after 5 years in 1986.
More than 9 Defence witness retired or expired, some of
them transferred from Jabalpur. Several important
documents requested by him were not produced. On many
occasions, further cross-examination of management’s
witnesses was stopped for absence of documents or its
production. Workman says that he had applied for
appointment of legal practitioners for his defence. His
application was not allowed. Enquiry was conducted in
violation of principles of natural justice. Workman further
submits that the documents were not proved by examining
any witnesses. His signatures on his application for
advance of LTC was not proved. Handwriting expert was
not appointed. He was not provided copy of documents
to enable him to take proper defence. Workman had called
for several documents. His request was not allowed. The
witnesses submitted for his defence were not called.
Several witnesses were not examined. Out of 5 witnesses
of management, 3 witnesses denied their statements.
Findings of Enquiry officer are perverse not supported by
cogent evidence. Enquiry Officer not followed the rules of
proving of documents. Mere production of documents
cannot be said proved. On such contentions, workman
has submitted that enquiry conducted against him is in
violation of the procedure of principles of natural justice,
finding is perverse. On such ground, workman prays for
his reinstatement with back wages.
3.
IInd party filed Written Statement at Page 6/1 to 6/3.
IInd party submits that on basis of report of false LTC
claim by the workman, CBI officials visited his house for
investigation. The report of false claim of LTC during the
year 1974 by workman T.No.1054/NIE Supervisor B WIS
GCF Jabalpur was received. Workman was issued
memorandum under Rule 14 of CCS(CCA)Rules 1964.
Workman was appointed as Turner A after completion of
4 ½ years training. He was posted in GCF Jabalpur and
later promoted as Supervisor B. The articles of charges
against workman was while working as supervisor in W-I
Section, he failed to maintain absolute integrity and
committed gross misconduct. He claimed false LTC Bill
dated 30-9-74 amounting to Rs.100.60 for himself and his
wife for Jabalpur to Hawda. That T.No. 27456 & 27457
were reserved in name of Shri Sen Gupta and Mrs. S.Ghosh
and for return journey said workman quoted ticket No.
1267 & 1271. When he could not have performed the said
journey with his wife as the workman was not married at
that time. He gressly contravened Rule 3(i) of CCS Conduct
Rules 1965. The chargesheet was issued to workman. He
did not accept the allegations. Enquiry Officer
M.Venkataraman was appointed. Mr. S.N.Saxena was
appointed as Presenting Officer. On transfer of Shri
M.Venkataraman, Shri B.K. Sharma GCF Manager was
appointed as Enqiry officer. On his transfer Mr. U.C.Saxena
was appointed as Enquiry Officer and Shri A.Srinivasan
as Presenting Officer.
4.
IInd party submits that workman was not married at
relevant time. The enquiry was conducted as per rules.
Punishment of removal was imposed against workman.
Considering the evidence and gravity of proved charges,
IInd party prays for rejection o claim.
5.
Workman filed rejoinder at page 9/1 to 9/3 reiterating
its contentions in Statement of claim. That the enquiry
was not properly conducted, he was not supplied
documents. The witnesses were not called for his defence.
All other adverse contentions of IInd party has been
denied.
6.
As per order dated 12-12-2001 my predecessor
dealing with preliminary issue regarding validity of DE
conducted against workman held workman admitted in
his application dated 7-9-01 that DE conducted in proper
manner. In view of this admission, it is held that the
Departmental enquiry was conducted against the workman
in a just and proper manner. Management was not required
to lead evidence to prove alleged misconduct of workman.
7.
The award was passed by my learned predecessor
on 18-2-02 against management and in favour of workman.
Order of compulsory retirement dated 22-1-88 passed by
management was quashed. Workman was directed to
reinstatement with back wages with consequential benefits
of his post, continuity of service was also allowed.
8.
Above award passed by my predecessor was
challenged by management filing Writ Petition No. 3400/
2002. Hon’ble High Court allowed Writ Petition and award
was set aside. The matter is remanded for re-deciding afresh
according to law allowing parties to adduce evidence as
per judgment dated 11-5-06.
9.
After remand of the matter, my predecessor framed
issue on 10-7-07. Issue No.1 is whether DE conducted by
management against workman is proper and legal. If not,
whether the management be permitted to prove the
misconduct. (2) To what relief the workman is entitled ?
10.
At the time of argument, it was emphasized by
workman Shri K.Dutta that Hon’ble High Court has
quashed the award the matter needs to be decided on
merit including the point whether enquiry conducted
against workman is legal? Considering above aspects and
submissions advanced, points which arise for my
consideration and determination are as under. My findings
are recorded against each of them for the reasons as
below:-
6282
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(i)
Whether enquiry conducted
In Affirmative
against workman is legal and
proper?
(ii) Whether the misconduct alleged
Not proved
against workman are proved from
evidence in Enquiry proceedings?
(iii) Whether the punishment of
In Negative
compulsory retirement imposed by
Appellate Authority is proper and
legal?
(iv) If not, what relief the workman is
As per final
entitled to?”
order.
REASONS
11.
Point No.1- Enquiry conducted against workman
was found proper and legal by my predecessor as per
order sheet dated 12-12-2001. The application dated
7-9-01 was submitted by the workman admitting that the
DE conducted against workman is in proper manner.
Workman filed affidavit of evidence dated 30-8-07. Affidavit
is silent w.r.t. above point that workman had submitted
application admitting enquiry conducted against him was
proper. The award passed by my predecessor was
challenged in Writ Petition no.3400/2002 by the
management. The reading of the judgment by Hon’ble
High Court in above Writ petition shows that the enquiry
conducted against workman was found legal by my
predecessor was not challenged by the management. The
award was challenged mainly on the ground that by
allowing claim of workman, it was observed that documents
relating to LTC were not proved as such charges could
not be proved. Hon’ble high Court said that zerox copies
of such documents were produced on record. Therefore
the matter was remanded back to decide the matter. The
workman has submitted exhaustive note of argument, his
notes are silent about the order dated 12-12-2001 by my
predecessor observing that workman admitted in his
application dated 7-9-01 DE conducted against him was in
proper manner. Workman himself admits that enquiry
conducted against him was proper. The Hon’ble High Court
has not specifically set aside said finding. Only the
directions are given to re-decide the matter. I donot find
any reason to take different view for deciding legality
conducted against workman. The application was
submitted by workman admitting enquiry was properly
conducted. Therefore I record my finding on Point No.1 in
Affirmative.
12.
Point No. 2, 3- In view of my finding on Point No.1
as applicant had admitted enquiry conducted against him
as proper, the question remains for decision is whether
the charges of misconduct alleged against workman are
proved from evidence in Enquiry Proceedings, whether
the punishment of compulsory retirement is proper and
legal. Workman has filed affidavit of his evidence at Page
32/1 to 32/9. His affidavit is devoted that enquiry conducted
against him was not proper, his defence was prejudice.
Document 8 to 11 were in custody of Enquiry Officer. List
of 16 witnesses was submitted. Workman was denied
opportunity to cross-examine the witness was prejudiced.
The evidence of workman remained unchallenged.
Workman was not cross-examined by management.
Management filed affidavit of evidence of its witness
Chumdemo Ngullie. He has stated that workman availed
15 days leave and availed LTC to his hometown for self
and wife for the block year 1972-73. That enquiry was
conducted by Shri Saxena. Workman was found not fit for
service and punishment of dismissal was imposed against
him. The evidence in cross-examination of management’s
witness shows management’s witness is posted from 2012.
He has no personal knowledge about the workman. He
submitted affidavit on the basis of documents.
Management’s witness did not give reply as to who was
appointing authority of workman in 1981. The witness of
management was unable to tell whether Director General
of Ordnance Factory was appointing authority for the post
of supervisor. He was unable to tell whether chargesheet
issued against workman was drafted by other agencies.
To be precise the evidence of management’s witness is
hearsay. The legal position is settled when enquiry is
found legal, only evidence in Enquiry proceedings needs
to be considered for deciding whether the charges are
proved. Unless enquiry is vitiated or found illegal, no
evidence is produced to prove misconduct alleged against
workman. In view of above, only evidence in Enquiry
proceedings needs to be considered in order to decide
whether charges against workman are proved. Exhaustive
written notes of argument is submitted by workman also
stating ratio held in various cases. However those many
citations are not submitted for my perusal. The notes of
argument are more in academic nature. There is no dispute
that only six witnesses are examined in the Enquiry
proceedings. Evidence of MW-1 Shri Kosta is from page
173 to 187. He appears to be the star witness in the Enquiry
Proceedings. His evidence shows that he had received
application for LTC advance dated 10-1-1974, GCF form
No. 642, surety is given by R.P.Vishwakarma, leave
application of Shri K.Dutta dated 27-12-73, order dated
7-1-74 permitting Shri K.Dutta for availing LTC, LTC
Advance Bill dated 11-1-74, Final LTC Claim Bill No. 7656-
dated 30-9-74 for Rs.32.60. It was forwarded to the cash
office for payment. That he sent two certificates alongwith
final claim. One certificate related to certifying the details
of the family performing the journey and the destination
of journey. Second certificate relates to the details of
factory order for onward and return journey which is signed
by the Administrative Officer concerned. In reply to Q.6,
he says the amount of Rs.68/- only. In his further evidence,
MW-I says those documents and statement of Shri Kosta
given during preliminary enquiry was examined by the
Defence Counsel. In his cross-examination Mr. Kosta says
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6283
he had given statement on 3-10-79. No one asked him to
give statement. The statement was recorded in GCF factory.
The statement was given in duty hours. He had given
statement at the place of duty, no third person was there.
His boss Shri Shukla told him to go and give statement.
Any one was not present and his statement was given. He
write his statement by hand. He was not shown
handwritten statement. In reply to Q.17, MW-1 Kosta says
he did not tally list of dependents and hometown of the
delinquent. It was done by the establishment section. In
reply to Q.23, MW-I claims ignorance about any proof but
it was true copy of the statement given before CBI
Inspector. In reply to Q.27, after seeing Exhibit P-5 he says
he filed Exhibit P-5 seeing Exhibit P-1- application for
advance. That the block year was ascertained by seeing
application. The witness admits that application for
advance of LTC was received on 10-1-1974. In reply to
Q.31, witness says application for advance was received
in the office by time keeper and time keeper gave to
incharge. Incharge gave it to concerned man. Sometimes
application is brought by the individual himself. The entire
evidence of MW-I Kosta doesnot show that application
for advance was signed by delinquent in his presence.
The delinquent has mentioned about his wife in the
application.
13.
Further cross-examination of witness No. 1 Kosta
as LDC working in preparation of LTC Bill, it was his duty
to compile the application and bills to kept in one place.
Inspector CBI was asking question from him and he was
replying the question. The same was written by him on
piece of paper. The statement recorded by CBI Officer is
not seen in Enquiry Proceedings. In reply to Q.39, he says
application for NIEs in question (Exhibit P-1) not filled by
him but P-5 is 100 % filled by him. In reply to Q.40, he says
in the application portion, he was taking the signature
after preparing the bill from the applicant. In case he fails
to write is designation etc, the same is completed by him
according to Exhibit P-1. In reply to Q.41, he says he himself
filled Form P-6. In reply to Q.42, he says that it was not his
duty to fill the bills. If whole evidence of MW-I is
considered, it doesnot clearly spell that documents Exhibit
P-1 to P-6 were filled by workman himself claiming LTC for
his wife. There is no dispute that at the relevant time,
workman was not marked. MW-I had verified information
from service book. There was no entry of wife as relative
of workman.
14.
So far as evidence of statement of management
witness No.2 is concerned, in his cross-examination reply
to Q.2, he says apart from checking those address and
block year, he had not checked depends of the delinquent.
In reply to Qr.3, he was unable to tell as to which authority
used to change the list of witnesses for LTC in case of
NIEs.
15.
Management’s witness No.3 in his evidence says
that he was engaged in leave application group. He was
doing registration of leave application of all NIEs in
E(T)Section. In his further statement in reply to Q.2, he
says Shri K.Dutta has applied for leave for 15 days from
after checking leave position from leave record, his leave
was booked as 9 days EL and 6 days Leave without pay.
His evidence has absolutely no bearing to claim LTC
benefit by delinquent for his wife. The statement of
management witness No.4 Gangaram Yadav is on the point
that delinquent was residing at his house 5-6 years back.
His further evidence shows that any lady were not residing
with him. The statement of witness No.5 Ramdas Yadav is
on the point that 7-8 persons including Shri Pathak were
residing in his house. His evidence has absolutely no
bearing to the claim of LTC by delinquent for his wife. The
statement of witness No.6 Shri N.L.Khadse, CBI Inspector
is on the point that he recorded the statements. Those
statements are not produced on record. The statements of
any of the witnesses of the management are silent that the
application for LTC benefit for his wife by delinquent was
signed by delinquent in their presence. The relevant
contents about family members, wife was written by
workman. In absence of such evidence, statement recorded
by management witness No.6 not produced on record.
The evidence is unsafe to place reliance. Evidence of
management’s witness is not cogent to prove the charges
against workman. The documents produced by IInd party
management are zerox copies P-1 to P-6 is not produced is
a mystery.
16.
Learned counsel for management Shri P.Shankaran
relies on ratio held in
Case of Uptron India Ltd. Versus Ammi Bhan reported
in AIR 1998-SC-1681. Their Lordship wrong concession
on question of law made by counsel is not binding on his
client. Such concession cannot constitute a just ground
for a binding precedent.
In case of Syed Rahimuddin versus Director General
CSIR reported in AIR 2001-SC-2418. Their Lordship dealing
with compliance of natural justice.
The ratio needs no discussion as the workman has
admitted by submitting application dated 7-9-01 that
enquiry conducted against him is proper. For the same
reasons, ratio held in case of AIR-1996-SC-492 &
2002(1)MPLJ-435 cannot be applied to present case.
17.
The evidence discussed on record of management
witnesses is not cogent, clear that the delinquent himself
had claimed LTC benefit for his wife. When the claim for
LTC Bill as processed from office, it could have been
immediately noticed that workman was unmarried at
relevant time. The office could have raised objection but
nothing of this sort was done by the IInd party. Charges
of misconduct alleged against workman cannot be proved
from evidence proceeding. Therefore punishment of
removal from service reduced to compulsory retirement
6284
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
by Appellate Authority is not justified. For above reasons
I record my finding in Point No. 2 as not proved and Point
No.3 in Negative.
18.
Point No.4- in view of my finding in Point No.2,3,
misconduct alleged against workman is not proved from
evidence in Enquiry Proceedings, the punishment of
removal from service or compulsory retirement cannot be
justified or legal, question arises to what relief the workman
is entitled? As charges are not proved, the punishment is
illegal. Workman deserves to be reinstated with continuity
of service with back wages. Accordingly I record my finding
in Point No.4
19.
In the result, award is passed as under:-
(1)
The action of the management of Gun Carriage
Factory, Jabalpur in compulsory retiring Shri
K.Dutta, Ex.Labour, GCF w.e.f. 21-1-1988 is not
proper and legal.
(2)
Management is directed to reinstate workman with
continuity of service and full back wages.
Amount as per above order shall be paid to workman
within 30 days from the date of notification of award. In
case of default, amount shall carry 9 % interest per annum
from the date of award till its realization.
R. B. PATLE, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 9 flrEcj] 2014
dk-vk- 2477-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947
dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj dLVEl ,.M
lsaVªy ,Dlkbt fMikVZesaV] Hkksiky ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa
vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa
dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k@Je U;k;ky;] tcyiqj ds
iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k lhthvkbZVh@ ,ylh@vkj@116@07) dks izdkf'kr
djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 8@9@2014 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&42011@139@2007&vkbZvkj (Mh;w)º
ih- osQ- os.kqxksiky] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh
New Delhi, the 9th September, 2014
S.O. 2477.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (I.D. No. CGIT/
LC/R/116/07) of the Central Government Industrial
Tribunal cum Labour Court, Jabalpur now as shown in the
Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers
in relation to the management of Customs & Central Excise
Department, Bhopal and their workmen, which was
received by the Central Government on 08/09/2014.
[No. L-42011/139/2007-IR (DU)]
P. K. VENUGOPAL, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,
JABALPUR
NO. CGIT/LC/R/116/07
PRESIDING OFFICER : SHRI R.B.PATLE
General Secretary,
Pichhdavarg Karmchari Kalyan Parishad,
9, Sanwer Road,
Ujjain.
.....Workman/Union
Versus
Commissioner,
Customs & Central Excise Department,
48, Admn. Areas, Arera Hills,
Hoshangabad Road,
Bhopal (MP)
.....Management
AWARD
Passed on this 1st day of August 2014
1.
As per letter dated 27-11-07 by the Government of
India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi, the reference is
received. The reference is made to this Tribunal under
Section -10 of I.D.Act, 1947 as per Notification No.L-42011/
139/2007-IR(DU). The dispute under reference relates to:
“Whether the action of the management of
Commissioner, Custom and Central Excise, Bhopal
in terminating the services of their workman Shri
Dinesh Malviya w.e.f. 31-3-03 is legal and justified?
If not, to what relief the workman is entitled to?”
2.
After receiving reference , notices were issued to
the parties. Workman filed statement of claim at Page 2/1
to 2/4. Case of Ist party workman is that he was appointed
on permanent post of peon by the Collector on 4-6-98 on
pay Rs. 7018/-. He was continuously working till
termination of his services on 31-3-03. Workman submits
that he had completed 240 days continuous service. His
services were terminated without notice or paying
retrenchment compensation. Termination of his service is
in violation of Section 25-F of I.D.Act. that he is covered
as an employee under Section 25 B of I.D.Act. the
principles of last come first go was not followed by IInd
party. After termination of his services other persons were
engaged. He was not provided employment. IInd party
thereby violated Section 25-H of I.D.Act. On such ground,
workman prays for his reinstatement with consequential
benefits.
3.
IInd party filed Written Statement at page 6/1 to 6/5.
Preliminary objection is raised by IInd party that workman
was not appointed by IInd party. There was no question
of termination of his service. Workman had not
continuously worked. There is no employer employee
relationship, any provisions of Section 25-F, G, H & N are
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6285
not applicable. All material contentions about appointment
of workman on permanent post of peon are denied. IInd
party submits that workman was engaged for 4 hours as
unskilled labour on contract basis. Workman was paid
wages at Collector rate. The contentions about increase
in wages from Rs. 762 to 818, 911 , 986, 1018 are misleading.
That the workman was engaged on purely temporary basis.
No dispute existing between parties covered under Section
25-F of I.D.Act. That as per law, IInd party is not bound to
give notice of termination or pay compensation. IInd party
did not terminate services of workman. Provisions of
I.D.Act are not applicable to IInd party. On such ground,
IInd party prays for rejection of claim.
4.
Workman filed rejoinder at Page 10/1 to 10/2
reiterating his contentions in statement of claim that
services of workman are terminated in violation of Section
25-F of I.D.Act. workman completed 240 days continuous
service. IInd party terminated workman without notice or
paying retrenchment compensation.
5.
Considering pleadings on record, the points which
arise for my consideration and determination are as under.
My findings are recorded against each of them for the
reasons as below:-
(i)
Whether the action of the manage-
In Negative
ment of Commissioner, Custom and
Central Excise, Bhopal in terminating
the services of their workman Shri
Dinesh Malviya w.e.f. 31-3-03 is legal
and justified
(ii) If not, what relief the workman is
As per final
entitled to?”
order
REASONS
6.
Workman is challenging termination of his service
for violation of Section 25-F of I.D.Act. Management
denied material contentions of workman denying employer
employee relationship. Workman filed affidavit of his
evidence. Workman has stated that he was working for 4
hours in office and 4 hours at residence of the officers
from 4-6-98 to 31-3-03. He worked more than 240days
continuous service. The services were terminated without
paying retrenchment compensation. In his cross-
examination workman says he was engaged by Suptd.
appointment letters were given to him. He received salary
through cashier. He denies working under any contractor.
Appointment letter was issued by the Administrative
Officer. He worked from 4-6-98 to 31-3-03. Thereafter his
services were terminated. IInd party did not adduce
evidence. IInd party admitted documents Exhibit W-3 to
W-16. From those documents, it is clear that workman was
continuously working with IInd party. The certificate
W-16 shows the workman was continuously working from
4-6-98 to 25-9-04. Documents produced by IInd party is
admitted by workman Exhibit M-1 to M-5 shows payments
of amount received by workman. The services of workman
is terminated without notice. No retrenchment is paid to
him. Therefore termination of services of workman is in
violation of Section 25-F of I.D.Act. For above reasons, I
record my finding in Point No.1 in Negative.
7.
Point No. 2- in view of my finding in Point No.1,
termination of services of workman is in violation of Section
25-F of I.D.Act, question arises whether workman is
entitled to reinstatement with back wages. The
representative of workman Shri R.Nagwanshi submitted
citations in case of Samishta Dube versus City Board
Etawah and another reported in 1999(81)FLR 746. In case
of Sanjay Kumar versus chief Executive, Janpad
Panchayat, Ratlam reported in 2010(3) MPLJ 457. In case
of Sanjay Kumar workman was reinstated with 50 % back
wages. The legal position is shattered from various
judgments of Hon’ble Supreme Court that daily wage
employees terminated in violation of Section 25-F of I.D.
Act can not be reinstated, reasonable compensation can
be awarded. In present case, evidence of workman shows
that the period of working of the workman is June 98 to
March-03 about 4 years 9 months. Considering the short
period of working and appointment of workman was not
made after following rules, therefore reinstatement of
workman would not be appropriate. Reasonable
compensation would meet the ends of justice. In my
considered view, compensation Rs. 75,000/- would be
reasonable. Accordingly I record my finding in Point No.2.
8.
In the result, award is passed as under:-
(1)
The action of the management of Commissioner,
Custom and Central Excise, Bhopal in terminating
the services of their workman Shri Dinesh Malviya
w.e.f. 31-3-03 is not proper.
(2)
IInd party is directed to pay compensation Rs. 75,000/
to the workman.
Amount as per above order shall be paid to workman
within 30 days from the date of notification of award. In
case of default, amount shall carry 9 % interest per annum
from the date of award till its realization.
R. B. PATLE, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 9 flrEcj] 2014
dk-vk- 2478-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947
dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj dLVEl ,.M
lsaVªy ,Dlkbt fMikVZesaV] Hkksiky izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj
muds deZdkjksa ds chp vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa
dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k ,oa Je U;k;ky; tcyiqj ds
iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k lhthvkbZVh@ ,ylh@vkj@115@07) dks izdkf'kr
djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 8@9@2014 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&42012@71@2007&vkbZvkj (Mh;w)º
ih- osQ- os.kqxksiky] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh
[No. L-42012/71/2007-IR (DU)]
P. K. VENUGOPAL, Section Officer
6286
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
New Delhi, the 9th September, 2014
S.O. 2478.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (I.D. No. CGIT/
LC/R/115/07) of the Central Government Industrial
Tribunal cum Labour Court, Jabalpur now as shown in the
Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers
in relation to the management of the Customs & Central
Excise Department, Bhopal and their workmen, which was
received by the Central Government on 08/09/2014.
[No. L-42012/71/2007-IR (DU)]
P. K. VENUGOPAL, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,
JABALPUR
NO. CGIT/LC/R/115/07
PRESIDING OFFICER : SHRI R.B. PATLE
General Secretary,
Pichhdavarg Karmchari Kalyan Parishad,
9, Sanwer Road,
Ujjain.
.....Workman/Union
Versus
Commissioner,
Customs & Central Excise Department,
48, Admn. Areas, Arera Hills,
Hoshangabad Road,
Bhopal (MP)
.....Management
AWARD
Passed on this 1st day of August 2014
1.
As per letter dated 27-11-07 by the Government of
India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi, the reference is
received. The reference is made to this Tribunal under
Section 10 of I.D.Act, 1947 as per Notification No. L-42012/
71/2007-IR(DU). The dispute under reference relates to:
“Whether the action of the management of
Commissioner, Custom and Central Excise, Bhopal
in terminating the services of their workman Shri
Rajendra Rathore w.e.f. 31-3-03 is legal and justified?
If not, to what relief the workman is entitled to?”
2.
After receiving reference, notices were issued to
the parties. Workman filed statement of claim at Page 2/1
to 2/4. Case of Ist party workman is that he was appointed
on permanent post of peon by the Collector on 4-6-98 on
pay Rs. 7018/-. He was continuously working till
termination of his services on 31-3-03. Workman submits
that he had completed 240 days continuous service. His
services were terminated without notice or paying
retrenchment compensation. Termination of his service is
in violation of Section 25-F of I.D.Act. that he is covered
as an employee under Section 25 B of I.D.Act. the
principles of last come first go was not followed by IInd
party. After termination of his services other persons were
engaged. He was not provided employment. IInd party
thereby violated Section 25-H of I.D.Act. On such ground,
workman prays for his reinstatement with consequential
benefits.
3.
IInd party filed Written Statement at page 6/1 to 6/5.
Preliminary objection is raised by IInd party that workman
was not appointed by IInd party. There was no question
of termination of his service. Workman had not
continuously worked. There is no employer employee
relationship, any provisions of Section 25-F, G, H & N are
not applicable. All material contentions about appointment
of workman on permanent post of peon are denied. IInd
party submits that workman was engaged for 4 hours as
unskilled labour on contract basis. Workman was paid
wages at Collector rate. The contentions about increase
in wages from Rs. 762 to 818, 911 , 986, 1018 are misleading.
That the workman was engaged on purely temporary basis.
No dispute existing between parties covered under Section
25-F of I.D.Act. That as per law, IInd party is not bound to
give notice of termination or pay compensation. IInd party
did not terminate services of workman. Provisions of
I.D.Act are not applicable to IInd party. On such ground,
IInd party prays for rejection of claim.
4.
Workman filed rejoinder at Page 9/1 to 9/2 reiterating
his contentions in statement of claim that services of
workman are terminated in violation of Section 25-F of
I.D.Act. workman completed 240 days continuous service.
IInd party terminated workman without notice or paying
retrenchment compensation.
5.
Considering pleadings on record, the points which
arise for my consideration and determination are as under.
My findings are recorded against each of them for the
reasons as below:-
(i)
Whether the action of the manage-
In Negative
ment of Commissioner, Custom and
Central Excise, Bhopal in terminating
the services of their workman Shri
Dinesh Malviya w.e.f. 31-3-03 is legal
and justified
(ii) If not, what relief the workman is
As per final
entitled to?”
order
REASONS
6.
Workman is challenging termination of his service
for violation of Section 25-F of I.D. Act. Management
denied material contentions of workman denying employer
employee relationship. Workman filed affidavit of his
evidence. Workman has stated that he was working for 4
hours in office and 4 hours at residence of the officers
from 4-6-98 to 31-3-03. He worked more than 240 days
continuous service. The services were terminated without
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6287
paying retrenchment compensation. In his cross-
examination workman denies that he worked on contract
basis. He worked as Farrash. Appointment letter was given
to him at Annexure P-1 to P-13. He had not submitted
application. The Suptd. received information about
vacancy from Suptd. in office. He knows N.K. Enterprieses,
but he has no concern with it. After 2 years he was paid
through N.K. Enterprieses, received appointment letter
through Admn. Officer. The wages were fixed at Collector
rate. The cross-examination of the workman did not shatter
his evidence that workman was working with IInd party.
IInd party has admitted documents P-1 to P-14. Bench
clerk is directed to give appropriate number to those
decuments. Those documents corroborate evidence of
workman that he was continuously working with IInd party
from June 88 till termination of his service. The working
hours of workman are shown 4 hours per day. The wages
paid to workman are also shown. IInd party produced
documents re admitted by Ist party. Bench clerk is directed
to give appropriate Exhibit Numbers to all those
documents. IInd party did not adduce any evidence. It
appears that IInd party is supporting claim of workman by
admitting the documents on record. From evidence of
workman and documents produced, it is established that
workman was continuously working with IInd party for
more than 240 days. His services are terminated without
notice, retrenchment compensation is not paid to him.
Termination of services of workman is therefore in violation
of Section 25-F of I.D.Act. For above reasons, I record my
finding in Point No.1 in Negative.
7.
Point No. 2- in view of my finding in Point No.1,
termination of services of workman is in violation of Section
25-F of I.D.Act, question arises whether workman is
entitled to reinstatement with back wages. Workman is
not appointed after following recruitment rules or selection
process. The period of working of the workman is June 98
to March-03 about 4 years 9 months. Considering the short
period of working and appointment of workman was not
made after following rules, therefore reinstatement of
workman would not be appropriate. Reasonable
compensation would meet the ends of justice. In my
considered view, compensation Rs. 75,000/- would be
reasonable. Accordingly I record my finding in Point No.2.
8.
In the result, award is passed as under:-
(1)
The action of the management of Commissioner,
Custom and Central Excise, Bhopal in terminating
the services of their workman Shri Rajendra Rathore
w.e.f. 31-3-03 is not proper.
(2)
IInd party is directed to pay compensation Rs. 75,000
to the workman.
Amount as per above order shall be paid to workman
within 30 days from the date of notification of award. In
case of default, amount shall carry 9 % interest per annum
from the date of award till its realization.
R. B. PATLE, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 9 flrEcj] 2014
dk-vk- 2479-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947
dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj cSad uksV izsl]
nsokl ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp
vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd
vfèkdj.k ,oa Je U;k;ky;] tcyiqj ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k
lhthvkbZVh@ ,ylh@vkj@92@96) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh;
ljdkj dks 8@9@2014 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&42011@04@95&vkbZvkj (Mh;w)º
ih- osQ- os.kqxksiky] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh
New Delhi, the 9th September, 2014
S.O. 2479.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (I.D. No. CGIT/
LC/R/92/96) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal
cum Labour Court, Jabalpur now as shown in the Annexure
in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation
to the management of the Bank Note Press, Dewas and
their workman, which was received by the Central
Government on 08/09/2014.
[No. L-42011/04/95-IR (DU)]
P. K. VENUGOPAL, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT,
JABALPUR
NO. CGIT/LC/R/92/96
PRESIDING OFFICER : SHRI R.B.PATLE
General Secretary,
Bank Note Press Office Staff
Association,
Dewas (MP)
.....Workman/Union
Versus
General Manager,
Bank Note Press,
Dewas
Management
AWARD
Passed on this 13th day of August 2014
1.
As per letter dated 27-3-96 by the Government of
India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi, the reference is
received. The reference is made to this Tribunal under
Section -10 of I.D.Act, 1947 as per Notification No.L-42011/
4/95-IR(DU). The dispute under reference relates to:
“Whether the action of the management of Bank
Note Press Manager Dewas in enhancing the working
hours from 37 ½ hours to 44 hours per week for
6288
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
office, Estate and Dispensary Staff etc. whose usual
working hours were 37 ½ hours earlier, per week
w.e.f. 28-3-92 without payment of additional incentive
or allowance or double the rate of overtime allowance
is justified or not? If not, to what relief the effected
workmen of Bank Note Press, Dewas (MP) are
entitled to?”
2.
After receiving reference, notices were issued to
the parties. Ist party Union submitted statement of claim
at Page 3/1 to 3/4. Case of Ist party Union is that working
hours of office staff of Bank Note press was 37 ½ hours
per week since establishment of Bank Note Press. Bank
Note Press vide notice dated 23-10-91 proposed to
increase the office hours of all staff in Block VI and LDCs,
UDCs Stenographers and office peons working in the
canteen, Dispensary, workshop, workmen office, control
office, LO office, Ink Factory and Stores etc. from 9 AM to
6 PM with one hour break. The Union had taken objections
to it. The management failed to consider objections of the
Union. Management unilaterally decided to implement
office hours. Subsequently vide office order dated 28-3-
92, management implemented change in office hours from
37 ½ hours to 44 hours per week on 29-3-92. Union
aggrieved by decision of management, entire working class
went on strike. Strike continued to 28-5-92.
3.
It is alleged that management started victimizing
workers by threatening dismissal from services and all
various disciplinary action. Management issued notice of
termination from services in respect of temporary
employees. Under said circumstances, Union was
compelled to arrive at a settlement with the management.
The settlement was signed between representative and
management on 31-7-92. Union had no alternative but to
raise the dispute before ALC, Bhopal. The conciliation
proceedings ended in failure. The dispute is referred for
adjudication. The increase of working hours from 6 ½ hours
per week. It is submitted that employees are entitled to
additional remuneration for extra working hours. Union
demanded additional remuneration for extra work taken
from the employees. Management refused to grant any
extra remuneration that normal working hours of ministerial
staff were 37 ½ hours since beginning. The increase in
working hours should be followed by additional
remunerations. If working hours are increased, pay scale
is to be automatically increased. That management has no
right to increase working hours without increase in pay
scale is reiterated. Management cannot be permitted to
increase working hours according to their will and wishes
without paying additional remunerations. That 4th Pay
Commission has made recommendations. The Pay scale
already fixed for 37 ½ hours per week, 4th Pay Commission
recommended working days 6 in a week. When working
hours were 37 ½ hours with 6 days working in a week, the
increase of working hours to 44 hours per week. The
recommendation for six days in a week was not considered.
The employees working in factory of same establishment
are working 44 hours in a week and getting overtime at
double the rate for extra work done and full incentive
whereas in case of ministerial staff the management has
adopted a step motherly treatment and refused to extent
any benefits to the ministerial staff either at par with the
employees working in the factory or as per
recommendations of the 4th Pay Commission. On such
grounds, Union submits that the employees are entitled
to overtime at double the rate for extra working for 6 ½
hours per week.
4.
Management filed Written Statement at Page 4/1 to
4/11. IInd party submitted that it is undertaking of Govt.
of India registered as Factory Employees of Group B, C
Non-Gazetted Staff B, A etc. is employed. The place being
factory at the time of initial appointment all ministerial
employee were told that they will have to work 48 hours
per week. Said condition was included as condition of
service in offer of appointment. That IVth Pay Commission
in Para 26.6 recommended that working hours of office
staff be increased suitably from present 37 ½ hours
working hours. With a view the need to maintain and
improve the level of productivity and also to reduce the
disparity in the working hours among the industrial
operative and office staff to some extent. Accordingly
working hours of all office staff were enhanced from 37 ½
hours to 40 hours. Govt. of India decided to enhance
normal working hours from 37 ½ hours to 40 hours per
week. The decision of Govt. was conveyed vide letter dated
28-10-87. Since office staff attached to factory are covered
by I.D.Act, notice dated 16-1-88 under Section 9-A of
I.D.Act was issued by management. 5 persons from office
staff vide petition before CAT Jabalpur in February 88
Original Application No. 94/98. Said petition was rejected
on 22-8-88 holding that Government was within its right
to increase the duration of these working hours and also
to rationalize the system prevailing in the 9 units referred
to earlier and also reduce the disparity between working
hours of office staff and administrative wing and the
industrial workers operatives of these organizations. The
staff agitated against increase in working hours. Dispute
was raised before ALC, Bhopal. On failure of conciliation
Government decided not to refer the matter to the Tribunal
in view of order passed by CAT, Jabalpur. On failure of
conciliation proceedings during pendency of petition
before CAT, Jabalpur, Workers Union resorted to strike
from 1-3-88 for 3 days. After protracted negotiation, an
understanding was reached with the office staff and Bank
Note press Shramik Sangh on 4-3-88. With a view to
remove disparity between normal working hours of office
staff and industrial workmen, notice dated 23-10-91 was
issued increasing normal working hours of office staff from
37 ½ hours to 44 hours per week. The staff association
served strike notice requesting withdrawal of the notice.
On failure of conciliation proceeding, the staff proceeded
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6289
on strike on 29-3-92 to 18-5-92. In accordance with
agreement reached between management and Staff
Association in July 1992, strike was called off and working
for 44 hours per week was started from 29-5-92. IInd party
submits that the working hours 37 ½ hours per week were
increased to 44 hours per week. The reference is restricted
as shown in the schedule is not justified. It is reiterated
that the dispute about increase in absence was decided
by CAT, Jabalpur in original application 94/88 on 22-8-88 .
Since the matter is already adjudicated, the reference is
barred by res judicata. The office staff shall observe 16
hours working per week and for extra working hours above
44 normal working hours overtime allowance admissible
as per Government orders is paid. Reason behind increase
of work is to remove disparity between working hours of
office staff and industrial workers as per recommendations
in IVth Pay Commission. It is further submitted that for
extra working beyond normal working hours, the workers
are paid overtime allowance as per scheme. The ministerial
staff who are not directly connected with the production
are getting overtime allowance. On such contentions, IInd
party prays for rejection of claim.
5.
Considering pleadings on record, the points which
arise for my consideration and determination are as under.
My findings are recorded against each of them for the
reasons as below:-
(i)
Whether the action of the Manage- In Affirmative
ment of Bank Note Press Manager
Dewas in enhancing the working
hours from 37 ½ hours to 44 hours
per week for office, Estate and Dis-
pensary Staff etc. whose usual
working hours were 37 ½ hours
earlier, per week w.e.f. 28-3-92
without payment of additional
incentive or allowance or double
the rate of overtime allowance is
justified?
(ii) If not, what relief the workman is
Workmen are
entitled to?
not entitled to
relief claimed.
REASONS
6.
Union has challenged increase of working hours
from 37 ½ hours to 44 hours per week giving notice under
Section-9 of I.D.Act. The claim of Union is opposed by
management. Affidavit of evidence filed by Shri Ashok
Joshi, Ashok Kumar Srivastava supporting contentions
of Union. That the affidavit of those witnesses are devoted
that casual working hours of office staff were 37 ½ hours
per week. Increase of office hours to 44 hours per week is
illegal. Employees are entitled to get additional
remuneration for extra working hours. That IVth Pay
Commission had recommended working hours 44 per week
with 5 days working. Shri Ashok Joshi witness No.1 in his
cross-examination said at the time of appointment,
conditions were explained to him. He had undertaken to
work 44 hours per week on recommendations of IVth Pay
Commission. The working hours were 44 hours per week
with 5 days working. His appointment order provides
condition of working 44 hours in a week. Witness No.2
Ashok Kumar Srivastava in his cross-examination says
that he admitted conditions at the time of his appointment.
That as per IVth Pay Commission, working for 44 hours
per week was recommended . that pay is fixed as per
recommendations of IVth Pay Commission.
7.
Management’s witness Shri Ahake in his affidavit
in para-7 of his affidavit has stated that on
recommendations of IVth Pay Commission, Govt.
enhanced working hours of 37 ½ hours to 44 hours vide
office order dated 28-3-92. His affidavit also devoted about
the order passed by CAT, Jabalpur dated 22-8-98.
Management’s witness in his cross-examination says
employees working 44 hours per week were not getting
benefit of overtime double rate. He denies that IVth Pay
Commission recommended 44 hours working per week.
The contents in Written Statement about the same are
incorrect. He was unable to tell since when Security Press
Nagpur was affected.
8.
The documents are produced Exhibit W-1 Clause IV
provides working hours 37 ½ hours per week. The
authority deserves right to fix such other timings as may
be appropriate. The order dated 9-5-75 about working hours
shows 37 ½ hours working per week for LDCs, UDCs,
stenographers, peons etc. the proforma for appointment
document 4/13 provide 48 hours working for industrial
workers. Letter dated 28-10-87 issued by Under Secretary
of Govt. of India shows that it was decided that normal
working hours for all employees working hours is 44 hours
per day. Notice of change Annexure V was issued for
increasing working hours from 37 ½ hours to 44 hours.
9.
During course of argument, learned counsel for
workman Shri A.K.Shashi emphasized that CGIT Bombay
had upheld claim of Union for 37 ½ hours working per
week, whereas counsel for management Shri Shekhar
Sharma emphasized that CAT Jabalpur had rejected claim
etc. challenging increase of working hours to 44 hours.
The copy of judgment in Original Application No. 94/88,
138/88 is produced. The contentions of the petitioners
opposing increase of working hours to 44 hours per week
has been rejected. Note was taken for decision to increase
the working hours by the government and not by the
management or General Manager. The increase in duration
of working hours of office staff cannot be considered to
be unreasonable. That copy of award passed by CGIT
Bombay is produced. Para-15 of the award at Page 9 clearly
shows that in view of above on request of ALC, the
management agreed- to await for decision of the Calcutta
High Court regarding the increase in the working hours
and not to implement/ enforce the changes proposed vide
their notice dated 16-1-1988 for the time being. In para -22
6290
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
of the award, it was deserved that it is tried to submit on
behalf of the management that the CAT at Hyderabad and
Jabalpur by their judgment dated 16-5-88 & 22-8-88 have
come to the conclusion that change in the working hours
which is tried to be effected by notice dated 16-1-88 is
just, legal and proper. On this basis Government declined
to make a reference in respect of to the dispute which was
raised by the present Union. Concluding part of Para-22 ,
it was observed while answering the reference, what I have
to see is whether the management had a right to increase
the working hours or not. It is not necessary for me to
discuss whether management has a right to increase the
working hours or not. Thus the award by CGIT Bombay
was passed considering breach of agreement to await
decision of Calcutta High Court and not to implement
change proposed vide notice dated 16-1-1988. Thus award
passed by CAT Bombay has not really decided the
controversy about increase of working hours on merit
whereas CAT Jabalpur has decided said controversy on
merit. No doubt the judgment by CAT Jabalpur cannot be
a binding president. However the pleadings and evidence
of the Union and its witnesses above indicated in rational
how increase in working hours is unjustified. The copy of
IVth Pay Commission recommendation about 44 hours per
week is not produced on record. The reasonings given by
CAT Jabalpur in his judgment is on recommendation of
IVth Pay Commission. There was increase in pay scales
that Govt. was justified in increasing working hours. It
appears logical. I find no other ground to hold that increase
in working hours 44 per week by Govt. for office staff is
improper. For above reasons, I record my finding in Point
No.1 in Affirmative.
10.
In the result, award is passed as under:-
(1)
The action of the management of Bank Note Press
Manager Dewas in enhancing the working hours
from 37 ½ hours to 44 hours per week for office,
Estate and Dispensary Staff etc. whose usual working
hours were 37 ½ hours earlier, per week w.e.f. 28-3-
92 is legal and proper.
(2)
The Union/ employees are not entitled to any relief
claimed by him.
R. B. PATLE, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 9 flrEcj] 2014
dk-vk- 2480-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947
dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj fMikVZesaV vkWiQ
VsyhdE;wfuds'ku] fcykliqj ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj
muds deZdkjksa ds chp vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa
dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k ,oa Je U;k;ky;] tcyiqj ds
iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k lhthvkbZVh@ ,ylh@vkj@216@91) dks izdkf'kr
djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 8@9@2014 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&40012@116@91&vkbZvkj (Mh;w)º
ih- osQ- os.kqxksiky] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh
New Delhi, the 9th September, 2014
S.O. 2480.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (I.D. No. CGIT/
LC/R/216/91) of the Central Government Industrial
Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Jabalpur now as shown in
the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the
employers in relation to the management of Department of
Telecommunication, Bilaspur and their workman, which
was received by the Central Government on 08/09/2014.
[No. L-40012/116/91-IR (DU)]
P. K. VENUGOPAL, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT,
JABALPUR
NO. CGIT/LC/R/216/91
PRESIDING OFFICER : SHRI R. B. PATLE
Shri Ram Gopal Yadav,
S/o Shri S.L.Yadav,
Tikrapara,
Bilaspur
.....Workman
Versus
Telecom District Engineer,
Bilaspur
.....Management
AWARD
Passed on this 31st day of July, 2014
1.
As per letter dated 12-11-91 by the Government of
India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi, the reference is
received. The reference is made to this Tribunal under
Section -10 of I.D.Act, 1947 as per Notification No.L-43012/
06/91-IR(DU). The dispute under reference relates to:
“Whether the District Telecom Engineer, Bilaspur
was justified in denying employment/ terminating
the services of Shri Ram Gopal Yadav as a casual
labour w.e.f. 1-3-1981? If not to what relief the
workman is entitled to?”
2.
After receiving reference, notices were issued to
the parties. Ist party workman submitted statement of claim
Page 2/1 to 2/3. Case of Ist party workman is that he was
appointed as casual mazdoor in August, 1979 in telephone
department, Bilaspur. He continuously worked till February,
1981. He continuously worked for 549 days. He claims to
be entitled for regularization in DE category. That he
suffered from illness in February, 1981. He received
treatment from Dr.R.A.Gurudiwan, Govt. Ayurvedic
Dispensary, Barni, Bilaspur. For about 9 years. That after
recovery of illness on 18-11-89 that application was
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6291
submitted after expiry of due period 31-12-88 was called
upon to explain delay. That workman submitted medical
certificate of his fitness. He had raised dispute after the
conciliation failed. On such ground workman prays for its
regularization in “B” Category after completion of 180 days
service. Pay and allowance for the period from 89 to 92 is
also prayed.
3.
IInd party filed Written Statement at Page 6/1 to 6/2.
Claim of workman is denied. Ist party workman was not
continuously working till 1981. He is not entitled for
absorption as per the prevailing rules. All other contentions
of workman are denied. It is submitted that Ist party
workman is not entitled to any claim as he remained absent
for 9 years. IInd party prayed for rejection of claim.
4.
Considering pleadings on record, the points which
arise for my consideration and determination are as under.
My findings are recorded against each of them for the
reasons as below:-
(i)
Whether the District Telecom
In Affirmative
Engineer, Bilaspur was justified
in denying employment/ terminating
the services of Shri Ram Gopal Yadav
as a casual labour w.e.f. 1-3-1981?
(ii) If not, what relief the workman is
Workman is not
entitled to?”
entitled to any
relief as claimed
by him.
REASONS
5.
The terms of reference relates to legality of
termination of services of Ist party workman. However
the statement of claim is filed claiming regularization after
completion of 180 days working. Above claim in statement
of claim is beyond terms of reference.
6.
Workman filed affidavit of his witness Shri
M.R.Dhurv supporting contentions raised in Written
Statement of IInd party. The management’s witness also
remained absent for cross-examination by workman. Both
parties half heartedly participated in reference proceeding.
Ist party as well as witness of management did not remain
present for cross-examination. Evidence of both of them
cannot be considered. For absence of evidence, the claim
of workman cannot be accepted. Therefore I record my
finding in Point No.1 in Affirmative.
7.
In the result, award is passed as under:-
(1)
The action of District Telecom Engineer, Bilaspur in
denying employment/ terminating the services of
Shri Ram Gopal Yadav as a casual labour w.e.f. 1-3-
1981 is proper and legal.
(2)
Workman is not entitled to relief claimed by him.
R. B. PATLE, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 9 flrEcj] 2014
dk-vk- 2481-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèfu;e] 1947 (1947
dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj tokgj uoksn;
fo|ky; lfefr ,.M vnlZ ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj
muds deZdkjksa ds chp vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa
dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k ,oa Je U;k;ky;] t;iqj ds
iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 63@2006) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh;
ljdkj dks 8@9@2014 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&42012@39@2006&vkbZvkj (Mh;w)º
ih- osQ- os.kqxksiky] vuqHkkx vfèkdkjh
New Delhi, the 9th September, 2014
S.O. 2481.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (I.D. No. 63/2006)
of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour
Court, Jaipur now as shown in the Annexure in the
Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to
the management of the Jawahar Novodaya Vidyalaya
Samiti & Others and their workmen, whcih was received
by the Central Government on 08/09/2014.
[No. L-42012/39/2006-IR (DU)]
P. K. VENUGOPAL, Section Officer
vuqca/k
vuqca/k
vuqca/k
vuqca/k
vuqca/k
dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k ,oa Je
dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k ,oa Je
dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k ,oa Je
dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k ,oa Je
dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k ,oa Je
U;k;ky;] t;iqj lh-th-vkbZ-Vh- izdj.k
U;k;ky;] t;iqj lh-th-vkbZ-Vh- izdj.k
U;k;ky;] t;iqj lh-th-vkbZ-Vh- izdj.k
U;k;ky;] t;iqj lh-th-vkbZ-Vh- izdj.k
U;k;ky;] t;iqj lh-th-vkbZ-Vh- izdj.k
la-
la-la-
la-la- 63/2006
Hkjr ik.Ms;] ihBklhu vfèkdkjh
jsQjsUl ua--L- 42012/39/2006–IR(DU) fnukad 11/10/2006
Shri Hari Prasad Joshi S/o. Shri Mathuralal Joshi,
Through Shri Baldev Singh, Legal Advisor, Dudwara,
Distt.- Kota (Rajasthan)
v/s
1.
The Director, Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti,
Regional Office – A-12, Shastri Nagar,
Near Pital Factory, Jaipur – 302016
2.
The Principal, Jawahar Navidaya Vidyalaya,
Village & P.O.- Chhan,
Distt.- Tonk (Rajasthan)
izkFkhZ dh rjQ ls % Jh j?kquUnu 'kekZ & ,MoksdsV
vizkFkhZ dh rjQ ls% Jh gokbZ flag & izfrfufèk
% iapkV %
fnukad % 30&07&2014
1-
dsUnzh; ljdkj }kjk vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèkfu;e 1947
dh èkkjk 10 dh mi&èkkjk 1 ds [k.M+ (?k) ds vUrxZr fnukad 11/
10/2006 ds vkns’k ls izsf"kr fookn ds vkèkkj ij ;g izdj.k
U;k;fu.kZ;u gsrq lafLFkr gSA dsUnzh; ljdkj }kjk izsf"kr fookn
fuEuor~ gS %&
6292
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
2.
“Whether the action of the management of the
Principal Navodaya Vidyalaya, Chhan, Tonk, in
terminating the services of Shri Hari Prasad Joshi
w.e.f. 15.07.2005 is Just and legal? If not, to what
relief the workman is entitled to?”
3-
Je ea=ky; ds vkns’k fnukad 13-6-2012 }kjk mijksDr
jsQjsUl fnukad 11-10-2006 dks la’kksfèkr fd;k x;k gS ftldks
fuEu :Ik esa xzg.k fd;k tkuk gS %&
“Whether Shri Hari Prasad Joshi S/o Shri Mathura
Lal Joshi was employed from 13.07.1996 to 14.07.2005
for 240 days in a year under the Principal,
NavodayaVidhayalaya, Village Chhan, District Tonk ?
if so, whether the action of the Principal, Navodaya
Vidhayalaya simiti in terminating the services of Shri
Hari Prasad Joshi w.e.f. 15.07.2005 is legal and
Justified? If not what relief the workman is entitled
to?”
4-
LVsVesUV vkWQ Dyse ds vuqlkj laf{kIr% izkFkhZ gfj izlkn
tks’kh dk dFku gS fd og okgu pkyd (MªkbZoj) ds in ij
foi{kh ds laLFkku esa thi pykus ds fy;s izkpk;Z] tokgj uoksn;
fo|ky;] Nku ftyk&Vksad }kjk fnukad 13-7-1996 dks fjDr
LFkku ij fu;qDr fd;k x;k FkkA izkFkhZ dks dksbZ fu;qfDr&i=
ugha fn;k x;k FkkA izkFkhZ yxkrkj bZekunkjh o esgur ls ukSdjh
dj jgk FkkA izkFkhZ us fnukad 9-8-99 rd 12 dSysUMj ekg esa 240
fnu ls vfèkd dk;Z dj fy;k rks izkpk;Z us vdkj.k dk;Z nsuk
cUn dj fn;kA izkFkhZ us foi{khx.k ls vuqjksèk fd;k rks izkpk;Z us
dgk ubZ xkM+h vk jgh gS vkSj xkM+h vkus ij izkpk;Z] egksn; izkFkhZ
dks dk;Z nsaxsA vkxs izkFkhZ dk dFku gS fd vxLr 1999 ls ekpZ
2003 rd foi{khx.k us izkFkhZ dks ukSdjh ugha nhA blds ckn
2003 vkSj 2004 esa foi{kh us chp&chp esa dk;Z fn;kA blds ckn
26-6-2004 ls dk;Z fn;k ijUrq 15-7-2005 ls fcuk dksbZ uksfVl
;k uksfVl ds cnys esa osru ;k {kfriwfrZ HkRrk fn;s ukSdjh ls gVk
fn;kA izkFkhZ dk dFku gS fd foi{kh }kjk izkFkhZ dks ukSdjh ls
gVkuk NaVuh dk dk;Z gS tks voSèk ,oa vuqfpr gS rFkk vkS|ksfxd
fookn vfèkfu;e 1947 dh èkkjk 25&,Q ds foijhr gSA
5-
;g Hkh dgk x;k gS fd izkFkhZ dk dk;Z fu;fer izÑfr dk
gS vkSj foi{kh ;g dk;Z u;k pkyd j[kdj djok jgk gS tks
vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèkfu;e 1947 dh èkkjk 25&,p ds izkfoèkku
ds foijhr gS vkSj voSèk gSA ;g Hkh dgk x;k fd izkFkhZ vkt Hkh
csjkstxkj gS vkSj foi{kh us izkFkhZ }kjk 12 dyS.M+j ekg esa 240
fnu ls vfèkd dk;Z djus ds ckotwn mls ukSdjh ls gVk fn;k
vr% U;k;ky; ;g ?kks"k.kk djs fd fnukad 15-7-2005 ls foi{kh
}kjk ukSdjh ls gVkus dk dk;Z voSèk ,oa vuqfpr gS rFkk izkFkhZ
lsok dh fujUrjrk lfgr lEiw.kZ osru ds lkFk lsok esa okil
fu;qDr gksus dk gdnkj gSA
6-
LVsVesUV vkWQ Dyse ds fo:) izLrj tokc fnukafdr
29-3-2010 esa foi{khx.k dh rjQ ls i`"B 1 ls ysdj i`"B 7 rd
izkjfEHkd vkifRr izLrqr dh x;h gS vkSj i`"B 8 ls i`"B 14 rd
izLrjokj oknksÙkj izLrqr fd;k x;k gSA
7-
izLrjokj vkifÙk esa LVsVesUV vkWQ Dyse ds izLrj 1 esa
Je ea=ky; }kjk izsf"kr jsQjsUl dks Lohdkj fd;k x;k gS vkSj
dgk x;k gS fd Dyse vkS|ksfxd U;k;kfèkdj.k ds le{k iks"k.kh;
ugha gksus ds dkj.k fujLr gksus ;ksX; gSA izLrj 2] 3] 4] 5 vkSj
6 ds dFku dks vlR;] vkèkkjghu] lkjghu vkSj fofèk fo:) gksus
ds dkj.k vLohdkj fd;k x;k gSA vfrfjDr dFku esa ;g dgk
x;k gS fd izkFkhZ }kjk mBk;k x;k fookn vkS|ksfxd fookn
vfèkfu;e 1947 dh ifjfèk esa ugha gksus ds dkj.k iks"k.kh; ugha
gS vkSj fujLr gksus ;ksX; gS D;ksafd tokgj uoksn; fo|ky;
vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèkfu;e 1947 esa ifjHkkf"kr **m|ksx** dh
ifjHkk"kk dh ifjfèk esa ugha gSA
8-
;g Hkh dgk x;k gS fd izkFkhZ dks foi{khx.k ds laLFkku esa
tokgj uoksn; fo|ky;] ftyk Vksad esa dHkh Hkh fdlh Hkh vkns’k
}kjk fdlh Hkh in ij fu;qDr ugha fd;k x;k FkkA ;g Hkh dgk
x;k fd okLrfod rF; ;g gS fd izkFkhZ dks dk;Z dh miyCèkrk
dks n`f"Vxr j[krs gq;s iw.kZ :Ik ls rnFkZ vkèkkj ij vkdfLed
nSfud osru Hkksxh ds :Ik esa dk;Z dh miyCèkrk jgus rd vkSj
fu;fer deZpkjh ds miyCèk gksus rd fu;ksftr fd;k x;kA
9-
oknksÙkj ds izLrj 3 esa foi{khx.k dk dFku gS fd izkpk;Z
us dHkh Hkh izkFkhZ dks u rks vdkj.k dk;Z nsuk cUn fd;k vkSj u
gh ubZ xkM+h vkus ij izkFkhZ dks dk;Z nsus dk vk’oklu fn;k
cfYd okLrfod oLrqfLFkfr ;g gS fd izkFkhZ Lo;a vU;= csgrj
nSfud osru Hkksxh ds :Ik esa fu;kstu miyCèk gksus ds dkj.k
tokgj uoksn; fo|ky;] ftyk&Vksad esa mifLFkr ugha gqvk vkSj
tc rc vkdfLed dk;Z dh miyCèkrk gq;h rks izkFkhZ ,sls dk;Z
djus gsrq nSfud osru Hkksxh ds :Ik esa mifLFkr gqvk rks izkpk;Z
}kjk mls nSfud osru Hkksxh ds :Ik esa dk;Z fn;k x;k] bl rF;
dh iqf"V izkFkhZ }kjk fnukad 3-3-2006 ls 8-3-2003 rd (6 fnu),
26-3-2003 ls 30-3-2003 rd (5 fnu)] fnukad 22-8-2003 vkSj
24-8-2003 dks ek= ,d&,d fnu dk;Z ij mifLFkr gksus vkSj
dk;Z fu"iknu djus ds rF; ls Hkyh&Hkk¡fr gksrh gSA foi{khx.k
dh rjQ ls mDr rF; dk fooj.k le>kSrk vfèkdkjh] dksVk ds
le{k tokc esa Li"V :Ik ls vafdr fd;k x;k gSA izkFkhZ }kjk
izLrqr izkFkZuk&i= fnukafdr 8-11-2005 ¼izn’kZ M&1½ rFkk
foi{khx.k dk tokc fnukafdr 24-11-2005 oknksÙkj ds lkFk
layXu gSA fookn dh iks"k.kh;rk ds lEcUèk foi{khx.k }kjk
le>kSrk vfèkdkjh ds le{k izLrqr izfrosnu fnukafdr 9-12-
2005 ¼izn’kZ M&3½ Hkh oknksÙkj ds lkFk layXu gSA
10-
;g Hkh dgk x;k gS fd nSfud osru Hkksxh ds :Ik esa fnukad
15-7-2005 dks izkFkhZ dh lsok lekfIr dk rF; vlR;] vkèkkjghu]
lkjghu ,oa fofèk fo:) vafdr fd;k x;k gS D;ksafd mls dHkh
fdlh fyf[kr vkns’k }kjk fu;ksftr ugha fd;k x;kA fnuakd
3-3-2003 dks izkFkhZ dk;Z dh vkdfLed miyCèkrk ds dkj.k
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6293
fo|ky; esa iqu% mifLFkr gqvk vkSj fnukad 8-3-2003 dks vuqifLFkr
gks x;kA blds ckn fnukad 26-3-2003 dks mifLFkr gksdj iqu%
30-3-2003 rd dk;Z fd;k vkSj iqu% vuqifLFkr gks x;kA blds
ckn izkFkhZ fnukad 22-8-2003 dks mifLFkr gqvk vkSj mlh fnu
,d fnol dk dk;Z dj iqu% vuqifLFkr gks x;kA blds ckn
fnukad 24-6-2004 dks mifLFkr gqvk vkSj dk;Z dj mlh fnu
vuqifLFkr gks x;kA blds ckn fnukad 12-5-2005 dks yxHkx
2 lky ckn izkFkhZ mifLFkr gqvkA fnukad 25-5-2005 rd dk;Zjr
jgk rRi’pkr~ iqu% vuqifLFkr gks x;kA blds ckn iqu% fnukad
8-6-2005 dks mifLFkr gqvk vkSj fnukad 14-7-2005 rd dk;Zjr
jgk vkSj iqu% vuqifLFkr gks x;kA blls Li"V gS fd izkFkhZ dk
LVsVesUV vkWQ Dyse vkèkkjghu gS vkSj i=koyh ij miyCèk
vfHkysf[k; lk{; ds fo:) gSA izkFkhZ dk mn~ns’; fcuk dk;Z
fd;s vkfFkZd ykHk ikuk gS vkSj foi{khx.k ij fu;kstu gsrq ncko
cukus dk vlQy iz;kl gSA mDr rF;ksa dk mYys[k foi{khx.k
}kjk le>kSrk vfèkdkjh ds le{k fookn ds tokc esa fd;k x;k
gSA le>kSrk vfèkdkjh ds le{k izLrqr mÙkj izn’kZ M&4
oknksÙkj ds lkFk layXu gS mDr fLFkfr ls ;g Li"V gS fd izkFkhZ
us ,d dyS.M+j o"kZ esa 240 fnu dk;Z ugha fd;k gS vkSj bl
izdkj èkkjk 25&,Q ds izkoèkku ykxw ugha gksrs gSA
11-
LVsVesUV vkWQ Dyse ds izLrj 4 ds fo:) ;g dgk x;k
gS fd foi{khx.k }kjk le>kSrk vfèkdkjh] dksVk ds le{k izkFkhZ dh
izkFkZuk&i= fnukad 6-2-2006 dk mÙkj izLrqr dj Li"V :Ik ls
;g mYys[k fd;k x;k Fkk fd izkFkhZ dks fo|ky; esa fu;fer :Ik
ls dk;Z djus ds fy;s dHkh Hkh fu;ksftr ugha fd;k x;k Fkk ,o¡
izkFkhZ }kjk ftl dk;Z izek.k&i= fnukad 21-2-1999 dk mYys[k
fd;k x;k gS og dsoy ek= izkFkhZ dks {ks=h; dk;kZy; ls
dk;ZeqfDr ls lEcfUèkr gS rFkk mDr dk;ZeqfDr vkns’k dks fdlh
Hkh vkèkkj ij izkFkhZ ds yxkrkj dk;Zjr jgus dk izek.k ugha ekuk
tk ldrkA mDr rF;ksa dh iqf"V izkFkhZ }kjk izLrqr fnukafdr
6-2-2006 e; layXu nLrkost rFkk foi{khx.k dh rjQ ls
izLrqr mÙkj ls HkyhHkkWrh gksrh gS ftldh ,d Nk;kizfrfyfi
izn’kZ M&5 ,oa izn’kZ M&6 layXu gSaA
12-
LVsVesUV vkWQ Dyse ds izLrj 5 ds fo:) oknksÙkj esa
mYys[k gS fd Lo;a izkFkhZ bl rF; dks Lohdkj djrk gS fd mlus
fu;fer fu;qfDr gsrq okgu pkyd ds in ij lk{kkRdkj gsrq
fnuakd 4-4-1998 dks izkFkZuk izLrqr dj Hkkx ysuk pkgk FkkA vr%
fu;ekuqlkj fu;qfDr dh fuèkkZfjr izfØ;k esa lQy gksus ds
i’pkr~ gh okgu pkyd ds in ij fu;qfDr izkIr dh tk ldrh
gSA
13-
izLrj 6 ds fo:) ;g dgk x;k gS fd izkFkhZ us lsok
lekfIr dh frfFk fnukad 15-7-2005 ds iwoZ 12 dyS.Mj ekg esa
240 fnu dk;Z ugha fd;k gS] vr% èkkjk 25&,Q ds izkfoèkku ykxw
ugha gksrs gSa vkSj u gh foi{khx.k }kjk èkkjk 25&,Q ds izkfoèkku
dk mYya?ku fd;k x;k gS] vr% izkFkhZ dk Dyse fujLr gksus ;ksX;
gS vkSj izkFkhZ ;kfpr vuqrks"k ikus dk gdnkj ugha gSA
14-
izkjfEHkd vkifÙk esa ;g dgk x;k gS fd tokgj uoksn;
fo|ky; **m|ksx** dh ifjHkk"kk esa ugha vkrk gS vr% U;k;kfèkdj.k
ds le{k izkFkhZ dk Dyse iks"k.kh; ugha gSA ;g Hkh dgk x;k gS
fd izkFkhZ ds i{k esa dksbZ okn gsrqd mRiUu ugha gqvk gS blfy;s
Hkh LVsVesUV vkWQ Dyse iks"k.kh; ugha gSA ;g Hkh dgk x;k gS fd
tokgj uoksn; fo|ky;] ftyk&Vksad] uoksn; fo|ky; lfefr
dh ,d vfHkUu bdkbZ gS tks ekuo lalkèku fodkl ea=ky;]
Hkkjr ljdkj dk ,d vfHkUu vax gSA izkFkhZ us uoksn; fo|ky;
lfefr dks i{kdkj ugha cuk;k gS] vr% okn esa vko’;d i{kdkjksa
dh vla;kstu ds dkj.k okn fujLr gksus ;ksX; gSA
15-
;kfpdk ds izLrj 5 esa dgk x;k gS fd foi{kh dk laLFkku
,d 'kS{kf.kd laLFkku gS tgk¡ eSèkkoh Nk=ksa dks fu%’kqYd f’k{kk
iznku dh tkrh gSA vizkFkhZ laLFkku esa ,slh dksbZ Hkh xfrfofèk
vFkok fØ;kdyki ugha fd;k tkrk gS tks okf.kfT;d laLFkku ,o¡
O;olkf;d bdkbZ;ksa }kjk vke tufgr] tui;ksxh lsok ,o¡
mRikn dk mRiknu fd;k tkrk gS] vr% foi{kh dk laLFkku
**m|ksx** dh ifjHkk"kk esa ugha vkrk gS tSlk fd ekuuh; loksZPp
U;k;ky; }kjk fQftdy fjlpZ yscksjsVªh cuke ds-th- ’kekZ ds
izdj.k esa dgk x;k gSA
16-
;g Hkh dgk x;k gS fd fgeka’kq dqekj fo|kFkhZ o vU; cuke
fcgkj jkT; o vU; ds izdj.k eas ekuuh; loksZPp U;k;ky; us
;g fl)kUr izfrikfnr fd;k gS fd nSfud osru Hkksxh deZdkj
dh lsok lekfIr fdlh Hkh izdkj ls LoPNUn] fujadq’k ,oa
euekuh ugha dgh tk ldrh] D;ksafd ,sls deZdkj dk fdlh Hkh
in ds lEcUèk esa dksbZ vfèkdkj ugha gksrk gSA
17-
izkjfEHkd vkifÙk ds izLrj 7 esa ;g dgk x;k gS fd
uoksn; fo|ky; lfefr ,d iathÑr laLFkk gS] ftldk iath;u]
laLFkk iathdj.k vfèkfu;e] 1860 ds rgr gqvk gS rFkk uoksn;
fo|ky; lfefr }kjk lfefr ds lapkyu rFkk lfefr }kjk
lapkfyr fd;s tk jgs uoksn; fo|ky;ksa gsrq lEiw.kZ fu;ekoyh
cukbZ xbZ gS] ftlds rgr fdlh in ij ;ksX; vk’kkFkhZ dh
fu;qfDr fuèkkZfjr p;u izfØ;k ds }kjk gh dh tk ldrh gSA
izkFkhZ mlds dFkukuqlkj ,d flfoy in èkkfjr djrk gS vr%
bl vkèkkj ij Hkh izkFkhZ }kjk mBk;k x;k fookn vkS|ksfxd fookn
vfèkfu;e] 1947 dh ifjfèk esa ugha vkrk gSA
18-
;g Hkh dgk x;k gS fd izLrqr izdj.k lsok ls lEcfUèkr
izdj.k gS rFkk iz’kklfud vfèkdj.k vfèkfu;e]1985 ds ykxw
gksus ds Ik’pkr~ fo"k;oLrq ds lEcUèk esa dk;Zokgh iz’kklfud
vfèkdj.k vfèkfu;e]1985 ds rgr xfBr dsUnzh; iz’kklfud
vfèkdj.k ds le{k gh dh tk ldrh gS D;ksafd lsok lEcUèkh
izdj.k esa lEiw.kZ {ks=kfèkdkj iz’kklfud vfèkfu;e] 1985 ds rgr
xfBr iz’kklfud vfèkdj.k esa fufgr gks pqdk gS ,oa uoksn;
fo|ky; lfefr ds lEcUèk esa dsUnzh; ljdkj }kjk èkkjk 14¼2½
dh 'kfDr;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq;s lsok lEcfUèkr izdj.kksa ds
lEcUèk esa lEiw.kZ {ks=kfèkdkj iz’kklfud vfèkdj.k vfèkfu;e]1985
6294
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
ds vUrxZr l`ftr vfèkdj.kksa esa fufgr dj fn;k x;k gSA
izkFkhZ&Jfed }kjk tks okn@fookn mBk;k x;k gS og mlds
}kjk **flfoy iksLV** ls lEcfUèkr gS] vr% ,slh ifjfLFkfr;ksa esa
izdj.k dks iz’kklfud vfèkfu;e]1985 ds vUrxZr xfBr iz’kklfud
vfèkdj.k ds le{k gh mBk;k tk ldrk gSA uoksn; fo|ky;
lfefr ,d iathd`r laLFkk gS ftldk iath;u] laLFkk iathdj.k
vfèkfu;e] 1860 ds rgr gqvk gS rFkk uoksn; fo|ky; lfefr
}kjk lfefr ds lapkyu rFkk lfefr }kjk lapkfyr fd;s tk jgs
uoksn; fo|ky;ksa gsrq lEiw.kZ fu;ekoyh cuk;h x;h gS ftlds
rgr fdlh in ij ;ksX; vk’kkFkhZ dh fu;qfDr fuèkkZfjr p;u
izfdz;k ds }kjk gh dh tk ldrh gS D;ksafd izkFkhZ mlds
dFkukuqlkj ,d flfoy in èkkfjr djrk gSA vr% bl vkèkkj ij
Hkh izkFkhZ }kjk mBk;k x;k fookn vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèkfu;e]
1947 dh ifjfèk esa ugha vkrk gSA
19-
;g Hkh dgk x;k gS fd izkFkhZ dks nSfud osru Hkksxh ds :Ik
esa fu;fer okgu pkyd miyCèk ugha gksus ds dkj.k vkdfLed
:Ik ls fu;ksftr fd;k x;k Fkk rFkk fu;fer okgu pkyd
miyCèk gks tkus ds rRi’pkr~ izkFkhZ }kjk fd;s tk jgs vkdfLed
dk;Z dh miyCèkrk lekIr gks x;hA vr% mifLFkr rF;ksa ,o¡
ifjfLFkfr;ksa esa izkFkhZ }kjk izLrqr izkFkZuk i= lO;; fujLr
Qjek;sa tkus ;ksX; gSA
20-
;kph i{k dh rjQ ls oknksÙkj ds fo:) tckcqy&tckc
izLrqr fd;k x;k gS ftlesa LVsVesUV vkWQ Dyse dh iqujko`fÙk
dh x;h gSA izkjfEHkd vkifÙk ds fo:) Hkh tokc izLrqr fd;k
x;k gS] ftlesa dgk x;k gS fd foi{kh dk laLFkku vkS|ksfxd
fookn vfèkfu;e dh ifjHkk"kk esa ifjHkkf"kr **m|ksx** dh Js.kh esa
vkrk gSA ;g Hkh dgk x;k gS fd izkFkhZ ds ikl okn izLrqr djus
dk Ik;kZIr dkj.k gS vkSj fcuk uksfVl fn;s foi{kh us gVk fn;k
bl dkj.k okn mRiUu gqvkA izkFkhZ dk fu;kstd foi{kh gS]
blfy;s mls i{kdkj cuk;k x;k gS vkSj tokgj uoksn; fo|ky;
lfefr dks Hkh i{kdkj cuk;k gS vr% vko’;d i{kdkjksa ds
la;kstu dk nks"k ugha gSA ;g Hkh dgk x;k gS fd pwafd nSfud
osru Hkksxh **deZdkj** dh Js.kh esa vkrk gS] blfy;s vkS|ksfxd
fookn vfèkfu;e dh èkkjk 25&F, G ,o¡ H dk izkfoèkku ykxw gksrk
gS vkSj fgeka’kq dqekj fo|kFkhZ o vU; cuke fcgkj jkT; o vU;
dk n`"VkUr orZeku ekeys esa ykxw ugha gksrk gSA izkFkhZ vkS|ksfxd
fookn vfèkfu;e dh èkkjk 2 ¼,l½ esa ifjHkkf"kr **deZdkj** dh
ifjHkk"kk vkSj foi{k 2 ¼ts½ esa ifjHkkf"kr **m|ksx** dh Js.kh esa vkrs
gS ftlds vuqlkj nksuksa i{kdkjksa ds chp mRiUu fookn èkkjk 2
¼ds½ esa ifjHkkf"kr **vkS|ksfxd fookn** dh Js.kh esa vkrk gSA izkFkhZ
dks ftl rjhds ls lsok&eqDr fd;k x;k gS og èkkjk 2 ¼00½ esa
ifjHkkf"kr **NaVuh** dh Js.kh esa vkrk gS blfy;s U;k;kfèkdj.k dks
orZeku ekeys esa lquokbZ dk {ks=kfèkdkj izkIr gS ,o¡ mDr dkj.kkas
ds vkèkkj ij iz’kklfud vfèkdj.k dks lquokbZ dk {ks=kfèkdkj
ugha gSA
21-
izkjfEHkd vkifÙk ds izLrj 10 ds fo:) dFku dks vLohdkj
djrs gq, ;g dgk x;k gS fd izkFkhZ dh lsok eqfDr ds ckn foi{kh
us nSfud osru Hkksxh deZpkjh dks gh MªkbZoj ds in ij j[kk gSA
fu;fer okgu pkyd dh fu;qfDr dh frfFk ugha vafdr dh gS]
ftlls Li"V ugha gS fd mldh fu;qfDr dc dh x;h] vr%
fu;kstd }kjk mBk;h x;h izkjfEHkd vkifÙk fujLr dh tk; vkSj
ekeys dh lquokbZ xq.kkoxq.k ds vkèkkj ij fd tk;A
22-
;kph i{k dh rjQ ls izysf[k; lk{; ds :Ik esa izn’kZ
W&1 yxk;r izn’kZ W&5 vfHkys[k izLrqr fd;k x;k gS blds
vfrfjDr izkFkhZ gfj izlkn tks’kh dk 'kiFk&i= izLrqr fd;k x;k
gS ftudh izfrifj{kk foi{k }kjk dh x;h gSA
23-
foi{khx.k dh rjQ ls vfHkys[k M&1 yxk;r M&6
izLrqr gSA foi{khx.k dh rjQ ls Jh lqèkhj pUn è;kuh] izkpk;Z]
tokgj uoksn; fo|ky;] ftyk&Vksad dk 'kiFk&i= lk{; esa
izLrqr fd;k x;k gS ftudh izfrifj{kk ;kph i{k }kjk dh x;h
gSA
24-
foi{khx.k dh rjQ ls lwph lfgr vfHkys[k izLrqr fd;s
x;s gS tks izn’kZ M&1 yxk;r izn’kZ M&5 gSA blds vfrfjDr
;kph dh mifLFkr rkfydk rFkk Hkqxrku dh QksVksizfr izLrqr gSA
orZeku izn’kZ M&1 yxk;r izn’kZ M&5 iwoZ esa vafdr M&1
yxk;r 6 ls fHkUu vfHkys[k gSA iwoZ es izLrqr M&1 yxk;r
M&6 oknksÙkj ds lkFk izLrqr fd;s x;s gSA
25-
izkFkhZ i{k dh rjQ ls fuEufyf[kr fofèkd n`"VkUr izLrqr
fd;s x;s gS %&
¼1½ 2003 osLVuZ ykW dslst ¼jktLFkku½] ;w-lh- i`"B 523 jktLFkku
mPp U;k;ky; ¼t;iqj [k.M+ihB½] tujy eSustj cuke fn
yscj dksVZ o vU;
¼2½ 2008 osLVuZ ykW dslst ¼jktLFkku½] ;w-lh- i`"B 730 jktLFkku
mPp U;k;ky;] tkSèkiqj ¼[k.M+ihB½] jkT; ,oa vU; cuke
fxfjjkt izLkkn ,oa vU;
¼3½ 2007 ,-vkbZ-vkj-] ,l-lh-MCY;w- i`"B 1712 eSllZ Jhjke
b.M+LVªh;y ,UVjizkbtst cuke egd flag ,oa vU;
¼4½ 2005 ¼4½ i`"B 90] osLVuZ ykW dslst] jktLFkku mPp
U;k;ky; ¼tkSèkiqj½] ;wfu;u vkWQ bf.M+;k ,o¡ vU; cuke Je
U;k;ky; ,o¡ vU;
¼5½ 2005 osLVuZ ykW dslst ¼jktLFkku½] ;w-lh-] i`"B 737 jktLFkku
mPp U;k;ky; ¼t;iqj [k.M+ihB½] Mk;jsDVj nwjn’kZu dsUnz
cuke fn tt] dsUnzh; vfèkdj.k ,o¡ vU;
26- foi{khx.k dh rjQ ls fuEu n`"VkUr izLrqr fd;s x;s gSa %&
¼1½ ¼1997½ 4 ,l-lh-lh- i`"B 257 fQftdy fjlpZ yscksjsVªh &
vihykFkhZ cuke ds-th- 'kekZ & izR;FkhZ
¼2½ ¼1997½ 4 ,l-lh-lh- i`"B 391 fgekU’kq dqekj fo|kFkhZ ,o¡
vU;& ;kphx.k cuke LVsV vkWQ fcgkj ,o¡ vU;&izR;FkhZx.k
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6295
¼3½ ¼2002½ 3 ,l-lh-lh- i`"B 25 flfoy vihy ua- 2002 dk
1283 jsUt QkWjsLV vkWfQlj &vihykFkhZ cuke ,l-Vh- gkfnekuh
& izR;FkhZ
27-
eSus mHk;i{k ds fo}ku vfèkoDrk dh cgl lquh rFkk
i=koyh dk lE;d~ voyksdu fd;kA ;kph i{k dh rjQ ls
fyf[kr cgl Hkh izLrqr dh x;hA
28-
tgka rd tokgj uoksn; fo|ky; dk **m|ksx** dh
ifjHkk"kk ls vkPNkfnr gksus dk iz’u gS] foi{khx.k ds fo}ku
vfèkoDrk dh rjQ ls ;g cgl fd x;h gS fd tokgj uoksn;
fo|ky; **m|ksx** dh ifjHkk"kk ls vkPNkfnr ugha gS blfy;s
izkFkhZ dk Dyse iks"k.kh; ugha gSA blds fo:) izkFkhZ i{k ds fo}ku
vfèkoDrk dh rjQ ls ;g cgl dh x;h gS vkSj fyf[kr cgl
ds izLrj 4 esa ;g mYys[k fd;k x;k gS dh ekuuh; U;k;ky;
us vius dbZ n`"VkUrksa esa uoksn; fo|ky; dks **m|ksx** dh Js.kh
esa ekuk gSA mYys[kuh; gS fd ;kph i{k dh rjQ ls vius
fyf[kr cgl esa Hkh fdlh n`"VkUr dk mYys[k ugha fd;k x;k
gS ftlesa uoksn; fo|ky; dks **m|ksx** dh Js.kh esa n’kkZ;k x;k
gksA foi{k }kjk 1947 2 ¼4½ ,l-lh-lh- i`"B 257 HkkSfrd vuqlaèkku
iz;ksx’kkyk cuke ds-th- 'kekZ ds n`"VkUr dk mYys[k oknksÙkj
dh izkjfEHkd vkifRr esa fd;k x;k gSA
29-
tgkW rd HkkSfrd vuqlaèkku iz;ksx’kkyk cuke ds-th- 'kekZ
ds n`"VkUr esa nh x;h fofèk O;oLFkk dk iz’u gS ftldk mYys[k
foi{khx.k us vius oknksÙkj esa fd;k gS] ekuuh; loksZPp U;k;ky;
ds le{k vihy esa ;g iz’u fopkj.kh; Fkk fd D;k vihykFkhZ
HkkSfrd vuqlaèkku iz;ksx’kkyk] vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèkfu;e 1947
dh èkkjk 2 ¼ts½ esa ifjHkkf"kr **m|ksx** dh ifjHkk"kk ls vkPNkfnr
gS \ bl ekeys esa izR;FkhZ ds-th- ’kekZ fnukad 25-10-1948 dks
**lkbZUlfVfQd Xykl Cyksoj** ds in ij fu;qDr gq, vkSj bl
in ij jgrs gq, 11-5-1976 dks QksVksxzkQh MkD;weSaUVs’ku lfoZlsl
esa ,d ,sls in ij LFkkukUrfjr dj fn;s x;s tks xSj&rduhdh
vkSj iz’kkluhd in FkkA fnukad 31-12-1978 dks mudh mez 58
o"kZ iwjh gks xbZ ftlds ifj.kkeLo:Ik mUgsa fnukad 1-1-1979 dks
lsokfuo`Ùk dj fn;k x;kA 58 lky dh mez esa lsokfuo`Ùk dj
fn;s tkus ds dkj.k vkSj 60 lky rd lsok dk volj u fn;s
tkus ds dkj.k mUgksaus ekuuh; xqtjkr mPp U;k;ky; ds le{k
fjV ;kfpdk izLrqr dhA blh chp mUgksaus Je vk;qDr ds le{k
lsokfuo`Ùk dj fn;s tkus ds fo:) f’kdk;r izLrqr dh ftlds
ifj.kkeLo:Ik Je vk;qDr us mudk ekeyk Je U;k;ky;]
vgenkckn dks izsf"kr dj fn;kA Je U;k;ky;] vgenkckn us
vihykFkhZ HkkSfrd vuqlaèkku iz;ksx’kkyk dk ;g dFku vLohdkj
dj fn;k fd HkkSfrd vuqlaèkku iz;ksx’kkyk **m|ksx** dh ifjHkk"kk
ls vkPNkfnr ugha gS tSlk fd vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèkfu;e 2¼ts½
esa dgk x;k gSA HkkSfrd vuqlaèkku iz;ksx’kkyk dks **m|ksx** gksus
dh voèkkj.kk O;Dr djus ds lkFk&lkFk fo}ku Je U;k;ky;
us ;g fu"d"kZ Hkh fn;k fd HkkSfrd vuqlaèkku iz;ksx’kkyk ,d
vuqlaèkku laLFkku gS ftlds }kjk fd;k tk jgk vuqlaèkku oLrqvksa
vFkok lsok dh mRikn ] vkiwfrZ vFkok forj.k ls tqMk gqvk ugha
gSA Je U;k;ky; us ekuuh; loksZPp U;k;ky; }kjk 1978 ¼2½
,l-lh-lh- i`"B 213 okVj lIykbZ ,.M flojst cksMZ cuke
okVj lIykbZ ,.M flojst cksMZ cuke
okVj lIykbZ ,.M flojst cksMZ cuke
okVj lIykbZ ,.M flojst cksMZ cuke
okVj lIykbZ ,.M flojst cksMZ cuke
,- jktkIik
,- jktkIik
,- jktkIik
,- jktkIik
,- jktkIik esa nh xbZ fofèk O;oLFkk ds vkèkkj ij mDr
voèkkj.kk O;Dr dhA Je U;k;ky; us ;g Hkh ik;k fd
Je U;k;ky; us ;g Hkh ik;k fd
Je U;k;ky; us ;g Hkh ik;k fd
Je U;k;ky; us ;g Hkh ik;k fd
Je U;k;ky; us ;g Hkh ik;k fd
HkkSfrd vuqlaèkku iz;ksx’kkyk Lo;a rFkk vius deZpkfj;ksa
HkkSfrd vuqlaèkku iz;ksx’kkyk Lo;a rFkk vius deZpkfj;ksa
HkkSfrd vuqlaèkku iz;ksx’kkyk Lo;a rFkk vius deZpkfj;ksa
HkkSfrd vuqlaèkku iz;ksx’kkyk Lo;a rFkk vius deZpkfj;ksa
HkkSfrd vuqlaèkku iz;ksx’kkyk Lo;a rFkk vius deZpkfj;ksa
ds lfØ; lg;ksx ls laxfBr ,oa lqO;ofLFkr i)fr ds
ds lfØ; lg;ksx ls laxfBr ,oa lqO;ofLFkr i)fr ds
ds lfØ; lg;ksx ls laxfBr ,oa lqO;ofLFkr i)fr ds
ds lfØ; lg;ksx ls laxfBr ,oa lqO;ofLFkr i)fr ds
ds lfØ; lg;ksx ls laxfBr ,oa lqO;ofLFkr i)fr ds
vuqlkj vuqlaèkku lEcfUèkr dk;Z&dyki dk lapkyu
vuqlkj vuqlaèkku lEcfUèkr dk;Z&dyki dk lapkyu
vuqlkj vuqlaèkku lEcfUèkr dk;Z&dyki dk lapkyu
vuqlkj vuqlaèkku lEcfUèkr dk;Z&dyki dk lapkyu
vuqlkj vuqlaèkku lEcfUèkr dk;Z&dyki dk lapkyu
dj jgh gS rFkk vuqlaèkku ls izkIr ekSfyd miyfCèk
dj jgh gS rFkk vuqlaèkku ls izkIr ekSfyd miyfCèk
dj jgh gS rFkk vuqlaèkku ls izkIr ekSfyd miyfCèk
dj jgh gS rFkk vuqlaèkku ls izkIr ekSfyd miyfCèk
dj jgh gS rFkk vuqlaèkku ls izkIr ekSfyd miyfCèk
rFkk vkfo"dkj fcØh ;ksX; gSA
rFkk vkfo"dkj fcØh ;ksX; gSA
rFkk vkfo"dkj fcØh ;ksX; gSA
rFkk vkfo"dkj fcØh ;ksX; gSA
rFkk vkfo"dkj fcØh ;ksX; gSA Je U;k;ky; us HkkSfrd
vuqlaUèkku iz;ksx’kkyk dks **m|ksx**
**m|ksx**
**m|ksx**
**m|ksx**
**m|ksx** gksus dh voèkkj.kk O;Dr
djus esa ekuuh; xqtjkr mPp U;k;ky; }kjk HkkSfrd vuqlaèkku
HkkSfrd vuqlaèkku
HkkSfrd vuqlaèkku
HkkSfrd vuqlaèkku
HkkSfrd vuqlaèkku
iz;ksx’kkyk
iz;ksx’kkyk
iz;ksx’kkyk
iz;ksx’kkyk
iz;ksx’kkyk ,EiykbZt ;wfu;u cuke ,-,u- jke ¼fo’ks"k flfoy
vkosnu la[;k 1082@79½ esa nh xbZ fofèk O;oLFkk dk Hkh
vuqlj.k fd;k ftl fu.kZ; esa ekuuh; xqtjkr mPp U;k;ky;
us ;g izs{k.k fd;k gS fd cSaxyksj okVj lIykbZ ,oa flojst cksMZ
cuke ,- jktIik ds ekeys esa nh xbZ O;oLFkk ds vuqlkj bl
lUns’k dh dksbZ xqUtkbZ’k ugha gS fd HkkSfrd vuqlaèkku iz;ksx’kkyk]
vgenkckn esa dk;Zjr deZpkjhx.k
deZpkjhx.k
deZpkjhx.k
deZpkjhx.k
deZpkjhx.k vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèkfu;e
ds vUrxZr **deZdkj** dh ifjHkk"kk
**deZdkj** dh ifjHkk"kk
**deZdkj** dh ifjHkk"kk
**deZdkj** dh ifjHkk"kk
**deZdkj** dh ifjHkk"kk esa vk,axsA Je U;k;ky;
vgenkckn us ;g voèkkfjr fd;k fd izR;FkhZ us 1948 ls ysdj
1976 rd ,d yEch vofèk ds fy, rduhdh in ij dk;Z fd;k
blfy, mls iz’kklfud in ij dk;Z djrs gq, O;fDr dh laKk
ugha nh tkuh pkfg, Fkh D;kasfd vius dk;Zdky ds vfUre fnuksa
esa mldk LFkkukUrj.k iz’kklfud in ij fd;k x;k Fkk ftl
le; mldh mez 58 o"kZ iwjh gks jgh FkhA mDr ifjfLFkfr esa Je
U;k;ky; us voèkkfjr fd;k fd izR;FkhZ 60 lky dh mez rd
lsok esa cus jgus dk gdnkj gS rFkk izR;FkhZ dks lsokfuo`fRr fd;s
tkus dk vkns’k fofèk fo#) ?kksf"kr fd;k vkSj ;g Hkh voèkkfjr
fd;k fd og vius in ij iquLFkZkiuk ds lkFk iwjh osru Hkh ikus
dk gdnkj gS ysfdu pwafd 60 lky dh mez iwjh gks pqdh Fkh
blfy, nks o"kZ dh vofèk dk osru fn;s tkus dk vkns’k ikfjr
fd;k x;kA vihykFkhZ HkkSfrd vuqlaUèkku iz;ksx’kkyk us lhèks
ekuuh; loksZPp U;k;ky; ds lkeus vihy izLrqr dh D;ksafd
ekuuh; xqtjkr mPp U;k;ky;
xqtjkr mPp U;k;ky;
xqtjkr mPp U;k;ky;
xqtjkr mPp U;k;ky;
xqtjkr mPp U;k;ky; us ;g n`"Vhdks.k viuk;k
n`"Vhdks.k viuk;k
n`"Vhdks.k viuk;k
n`"Vhdks.k viuk;k
n`"Vhdks.k viuk;k
Fkk fd HkkSfrd vuqlaèkku iz;ksx’kkyk **m|ksx** dh
Fkk fd HkkSfrd vuqlaèkku iz;ksx’kkyk **m|ksx** dh
Fkk fd HkkSfrd vuqlaèkku iz;ksx’kkyk **m|ksx** dh
Fkk fd HkkSfrd vuqlaèkku iz;ksx’kkyk **m|ksx** dh
Fkk fd HkkSfrd vuqlaèkku iz;ksx’kkyk **m|ksx** dh
ifjHkk"kk ls vkPNkfnr gSA
ifjHkk"kk ls vkPNkfnr gSA
ifjHkk"kk ls vkPNkfnr gSA
ifjHkk"kk ls vkPNkfnr gSA
ifjHkk"kk ls vkPNkfnr gSA ekuuh; loksZPp U;k;ky; us ;g
voèkkfjr fd;k fd fdlh Hkh i{kdkj dk ;g dFku ugha gS fd
HkkSfrd vuqlaèkku iz;ksx’kkyk ,slh xfrfofèk esa layXu gS ftls
m|e] okf.kT;deZ ;k fuekZ.k dgk tk ldsA ekuuh; loksZPp
U;k;ky; us ;g Hkh voèkkfjr fd;k] “Neither from the nature
of its organization nor from the nature and character of the
activity carried on by it, it can be said to be an ‘undertaking’
analogous to business or trade. It is not engaged in a
commercial industrial activity and in cannot be described
as an economic venture or a commercial enterprise as it is
6296
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
not its object to produce and distribute services which
would satisfy wants and needs of the consumer
community. It is more an institution discharging
Governmental functions and a domestic enterprise than a
commercial enterprise. We are, therefore, of the opinion
that PRL is not an ‘industry’ even though it is carrying on
the activity of research in a systematic manner with the
help of its employees as it lacks that element which would
make it an organisation carrying on an activity which can
be said to be analogous to the carrying on of a trade or
business because it is not producing and distributing
services which are intended or meant for satisfying human
wants and needs, as ordinarily understood.” ekuuh; loksZPp
U;k;ky; us rn~uqlkj HkkSfrd vuqlaèkku iz;ksx’kkyk dh vihy
Lohdkj dh rFkk fo}ku Je U;k;ky; vgenkckn }kjk ikfjr
iapkV dks fujLr fd;kA
30-
1988 lqizhe dksVZ dslst ¼,y- ,.M ,l-½ i`"B 892 fel
,- lqUnjecky & ;kph cuke xksok neu ,oa fnm ljdkj ,oa
vU; & izR;FkhZx.k esa ekuuh; loksZPp U;k;ky; us ;g voèkkfjr
fd;k gS fd vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèkfu;e 1947 dh èkkjk 2 ¼,l½
esa ifjHkkf"kr **deZdkj** dh ifjHkk"kk ls **vè;kid** vkPNkfnr
ugha gS ysfdu èkkjk 2 ¼ts½ esa ifjHkkf"kr **m|ksx** dh ifjHkk"kk ls
**’kS{kf.kd laLFkku** vkPNkfnr gaSA fel ,-lqUnjecky cuke
xksok neu ,oa fnm ljdkj ,ao vU; ds ekeys esa vihykfFkZuh
izR;FkhZ ds fo|ky; esa ,d vè;kid ds :Ik esa fu;qDr Fkh ftldh
lsok,a fo|ky; ds izcUèku ds }kjk i= fnukafdr 25-4-1975 ds
ekè;e ls lekIr dj nh xbZA lsoklekfIr dk vkns’k lekIr
djkus esa vusd iz;klksa ds foQy gksus ds ckn vkS|ksfxd fookn
vfèkfu;e ds vUrxZr vihykfFkZuh us **lqyg vfèkdkjh** ds le{k
vkS|ksfxd fookn mBk;kA lqyg le>kSrk dh dk;Zokgh lQy
ugha gqbZA ;g ikdj fd vihykFkhZuh deZdkj dh ifjHkk"kk ls
vkPNkfnr ugha gS ljdkj us vihykfFkZuh ds ekeys dks Je
U;k;ky; esa fu.kZ;kFkZ Hkstus ls euk dj fn;kA blds ckn
vihykFkhZuh us ekuuh; mPp U;k;ky; eqEcbZ dh i.kth ihB]
xksok ds le{k fjV ;kfpdk izLrqr dh vkSj ;g ;kpuk dh fd
'kklu dks fufnZ"V fd;k tk; fd mlds ekeys dks Je U;k;ky;
ds le{k izsf"kr djs rkfd mldh lsok lekfIr ds vkns’k fd
oS|rk dk fu.kZ; gks ldsA ekuuh; mPp U;k;ky; us vihykfFkZuh
dh fjV ;kfpdk fujLr dh vkSj ;g voèkkfjr fd;k fd
vihykfFkZuh **deZdkj** dh ifjHkk"kk ls vkPNkfnr ugha Fkh
ftlls {kqCèk gksdj vihykfFkZuh us ekuuh; loksZPp U;k;ky; ds
le{k vihy izLrqr dhA ekuuh; loksZPp U;k;ky; ds le{k
fu.kZ;kFkZ fuEu nks iz’u vorfjr gq, %&
¼1½
D;k og fo|ky; ftlesa vihykfFkZuh dk;Zjr Fkh og
**m|ksx** Fkk \
¼2½
D;k vihykfFkZuh **deZdkj** Fkh rFkk ml **m|ksx** esa
fu;qDr Fkh \
ekuuh; loksZPp U;k;ky; us cSaxyksj okVj lIykbZ ,oa
flojst cksMZ cuke vkj-jktIik lfgr vius vusd iwoZ fu.kZ;ksa dk
lanHkZ ysrs gq, ;g voèkkfjr fd;k fd ’kS{kf.kd laLFkku ftlesa
vihykfFkZuh dk;Zjr Fkh og **m|ksx** dh ifjHkk"kk ls vkPNkfnr
FkkA vihykfFkZuh ds lanHkZ esa ekuuh; loksZPp U;k;ky; us fu.kZ;
ds izLrj 10 esa ;g voèkkfjr fd;k gS fd vihykfFkZuh **deZdkj**
ugha FkhA bl izdkj ekuuh; loksZPp U;k;ky; us ekuuh; mPp
U;k;ky; ds fu.kZ; dh iqf"V dhA
31-
mDr fofèk O;oLFkk ls ;g Li"V gS fd foi{kh dh laLFkk
ij vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèkfu;e ds izkfoèkku ykxw gksrs gS vkSj
lkslk;Vht jftLVs~’ku vfèkfu;e 1860 dk dksbZ izkfoèkku bl
eqdnesa dh lquokbZ ds lEcUèk esa bl U;k;ky; dh vfèkdkfjrk
dks izHkkfor ugha djrk gSA
32-
fgekU’kq dqekj fo|kFkhZ ,oa vU; &;kph] cuke fcgkj jkT;
,ao vU;& izR;FkhZx.k] esa mHk;i{k }kjk LohÑr rF;ksa ds vuqlkj
;kph la[;k ,d fnukad 1-8-88 dks lgk;d ds in ij] ;kph
la[;k nks fnukad 10-11-89 dks MªkbZoj ds in ij rFkk ;kph
la[;k 3 yxk;r 5 pijklh ds in ij 31-5-87 vkSj 22-4-92 dks]
dks&vkWijsfVo Vªsfuax Ldwy] nso?kj esa fizfUliy }kjk nSfud
osru Hkksxh ds :Ik esa fu;qDr fd, x,A mudh lsok;sa fizfUliy
}kjk lekIr dj nh x;h ftlls {kqCèk gksdj mUgksaus ekuuh;
mPp U;k;ky; esa ;kfpdk izLrqr dhA ekuuh; mPp U;k;ky;
dh ,dyihB us ;kphx.k dh ;kfpdk fujLr dh ftldh iqf"V
ekuuh; [k.MihB }kjk dh x;hA ekuuh; [k.MihB ds fu.kZ;
ls {kqCèk gksdj ;kphx.k us ekuuh; loksZPp U;k;ky; ds le{k
fo’ks"k vuqefr ;kfpdk bl vkèkkj ij izLrqr dh fd vkS|ksfxd
fookn vfèkfu;e 1947 dh èkkjk 25 (,Q) ds mya?ku esa mudh
lsok;as lekIr dh x;h gSa vr% ekuuh; loksZPp U;k;ky; ds
le{k ;g iz’u fopkj.kh; Fkk fd D;k ;g dgk tk ldrk gS fd
;kphx.k dh **NVuh** dj nh x;h gS tSlkfd èkkjk 25 (,Q)
vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèkfu;e 1947 esa dgk x;k gS \ lEcfUèkr
rF; ,oa ifjfLFkfr;ksa ds ewY;kaduksijkUr ekuuh; loksZPp U;k;ky;
us ;g ik;k fd vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèkfu;e 1947 ds vUrxZr
mudh lsokeqfDr **NVuh** ugha FkhA ekuuh; loksZPp U;k;ky;
us ;g voèkkfjr fd;k] “every Department of the Government
cannot be treated to be ‘industry’. When the appointments
are regulated by the statutory rules, the concept of
‘industry’ to that extent stands excluded. Admittedly, they
were not appointed to the post in accordance with the
rules but were engaged on the basis of need of the work.
They are temporary employees working on daily wages.
Under these circumstances, their disengagement from
service cannot be construed to be a retrenchment under
the Industrial Disputes Act. The concept of ‘retrenchment’
therefore, cannot be stretched to such an extent as to cover
these employees. The learned counsel for the petitioners
seeks to contend that in the High Court, the petitioners did
not contend that it is a case of retrenchment but termination
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6297
of their services is arbitrary. Since they are only daily-wage
employees and have no right to the posts, their
disengagement is not arbitrary. The special leave petition
is accordingly dismissed.” bl ekeys esa ekuuh; mPp
U;k;ky; ,oa lokZsPp U;k;ky; us dks&vkWijsfVo Vsªfuax Ldwy
dks **m|ksx** dh ifjHkk"kk esa 'kkfey gksus ds fy, vuqIk;qDr
ik;kA
33-
izkFkhZ i{k dh rjQ ls izLrqr n`"VkUr 2008 osLVuZ ykW
dslst ¼jktLFkku½] ;w-lh- i`"B 730 jktLFkku mPp U;k;ky;]
¼tksèkiqj½ ¼[k.MihB½] jkT; ,oa vU; cuke fxfjjkt izLkkn ,oa
vU; esa ekuuh; jktLFkku mPp U;k;ky; ¼tksèkiqj½ }kjk nh
x;h fofèk O;oLFkk dk mYys[k fd;k tkuk Hkh izklafxd gS ftlesa
ekuuh; mPp U;k;ky; us ;g voèkkfjr fd;k gS fd va’kdkyhu
deZpkjh Hkh èkkjk 25&,Q vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèkfu;e ds ykHk dk
gdnkj gSA
34-
i{kdkjksa }kjk izLrqr cgl mDr fofèkd n`"VkUrksa esa nh
x;h fofèkd O;oLFkk rFkk orZeku ekeys dh rF; ,oa ifjfLFkfr
dks n`f"Vxr j[krs gq, eSa bl fu"d"kZ ij gw¡ fd foi{kh dk laLFkku
,d 'kS{kf.kd laLFkku gS tks **m|ksx** dh ifjHkk"kk ls vkPNkfnr
gS vkSj izkFkhZ fufoZokn :Ik ls deZdkj dh ifjHkk"kk ls vkPNkfnr
gS tSlk fd ekuuh; jktLFkku mPp U;k;ky; us ;g voèkkfjr
fd;k gSA rn~uqlkj bl U;k;kfèkdj.k dks mHk;i{k ds chp
mRiUu fookn ls lEcfUèkr orZeku ekeys dh lquokbZ dk
{ks=kfèkdkj izkIr gSA
35-
foi{khx.k dh rjQ ls izkjfEHkd vkifRr esa ;g mYys[k
fd;k x;k fd izkFkhZ us uoksn; fo|ky; lfefr dks i{kdkj ugha
cuk;k gS blfy;s vko’;d i{kdkjksa ds vla;kstu ds dkj.k okn
fujLr gksus ;ksX; gS ftlds fo#) izkFkhZ i{k dk tokc gS fd
fu;kstd dks i{kdkj cuk;k x;k gS vkSj tokgj uoksn; fo|ky;
lfefr dks Hkh i{kdkj cuk;k x;k gS blfy, vla;kstu dk nks"k
ugha gSA bl lUnHkZ esa mYys[kuh; gS fd fofèk dh ;g lqLFkkfir
O;oLFkk gS fd fdlh Hkh U;k;ky; ds le{k fopkjkèkhu okn esa
og O;fDr vko’;d i{kdkj gS ftlds vHkko esa izHkkfor fMØh
ikfjr ugha dh tk ldrhA orZeku ekeys esa ,slh fLFkfr ugha gS]
vr% foi{k ds i{kdkjksa ds vla;kstu ds lEcUèk esa izLrqr dFku
esa dksbZ cy ugha gSA
36-
foi{k dh rjQ ls ;g izkjfEHkd vkifRr Hkh mBkbZ xbZ gS
fd bl ekeys esa lquokbZ dk {ks=kfèkdkj iz’kklfud vfèkdj.k dks
gS vkSj izkFkhZ }kjk mBk;k x;k fookn vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèkfu;e
dh ifjfèk esa ugha vkrk gSA mijksDr izLrjksa dh O;k[;k esa ;g
voèkkfjr fd;k x;k gS fd ekeyk vkS|ksfxd fookn gS vkSj bl
U;k;kfèkdj.k dks bl ekeys esa lquokbZ dk {ks=kfèkdkj izkIr gSA
iz’kklfud vfèkdj.k vfèkfu;e 1985 ds fdlh izkfoèkku esa bl
U;k;kfèkdj.k ds {ks=kfèkdkj dks izHkkfor ugha fd;k x;k gSA èkkjk
14 ¼2½ iz’kklfud vfèkdj.k vfèkfu;e 1985 esa ,slh dksbZ
O;oLFkk ugha gS ftlls bl voèkkj.kk dks cy feys fd orZeku
ekeysa esa bl U;k;kfèkdj.k dks lquokbZ dk vfèkdkj izkIr ugha
gS] vr% foi{k dh bl izkjfEHkd vkifRr esa dksbZ cy ugha gSA
37-
tgka rd la’kksfèkr jsQjsUl ds vuqlkj izkFkhZ Jh gjhizlkn
tks’kh ds fnukad 13-7-96 ls 14-7-2005 rd dk;Zjr jgus dk
iz’u gS izkFkhZ us ;kfpdk esa izLrj 2 esa ;g mYys[k fd;k gS fd
mldh fu;qfDr fnukad 13-7-96 dks fjDr in ij gqbZ Fkh] ysfdu
dksbZ fu;qfDr i= ugha fn;k x;k FkkA oknksÙkj esa ;g mYys[k
fd;k x;k gS fd rnFkZ vkèkkj ij nSfud osru Hkksxh ds :Ik esa
fu;fer deZpkjh ds miyCèk gksus rd ds fy, og fu;ksftr
fd;k x;k FkkA izkFkhZ dh fu;qfDr fnukad 13-7-96 dks gqbZ bl
rF; dks oknksÙkj esa Li"V :Ik ls bUdkj ugha fd;k x;k gSA
foi{khx.k dh rjQ ls izLrqr vfHkys[k tks ;kph dh vkosnu
fnukad 11-11-2010 ds vuqikyu esa izLrqr fd;k x;k gS mlesa
tqykbZ esa mifLFkfr iaftdk dh izfr ds voyksdu ls ;g tkfgj
gS fd izkFkhZ fnukad 13-7-96 dks mifLFkr n’kkZ;k x;k gS blls
izkFkhZ ds bl dFku ds iqf"V gksrh gS fd fnukad 13-7-96 dks og
dk;Z ij j[kk x;k ;|fi mls dksbZ fyf[kr fu;qfDr i= ugha
fn;k x;kA izkFkhZ+ us izfrijh{kk esa ;g mYys[k fd;k gS fd mls
dksbZ fu;qfDr i= ugha fn;k x;k Fkk rFkk bl lEcUèk esa dksbZ
fyf[kr vkns’k Hkh ugha fn;k x;k FkkA Jh lqèkhj pUnz è;kuh]
izkpk;Z] tokgj uoksn; fo|ky;] Nku] ftyk Vksad us lk{; esa
viuk 'kiFk i= izLrqr fd;k gS vkSj izfrijh{kk esa ;g dgk gS
fd fnukad 13-7-96 ls izkFkhZ us dk;Z ij vkuk 'kq: fd;k Fkk ;k
ugha] bldh tkudkjh mUgsa ugha gS] ijUrq mYys[kuh; gS fd
foi{k dh rjQ ls izLrqr mifLFkfr iaftdk dh QksVksizfr ls ;g
Li"V gS fd fnukad 13-7-96 dks izkFkhZ mifLFkfr iaftdk esa
mifLFkr n’kkZ;k x;k gS rFkk 60 #- izfrfnu dh nj ls dqy 15
fnu dk;Z djus ds fy, mldks 900 #- dk Hkqxrku fd;k x;k
gS rFkk izkFkhZ ds uke ds le{k ekg tqykbZ 1996 dk Hkqxrku izkIr
djus ds lEcUèk esa mlds gLrk{kj gSA izn’kZ&MCY;w 3 izkFkhZ dh
rjQ ls fnukad 17-7-2008 ds vkosnu ds ekè;e ls izLrqr
vfHkys[k gS ftlesa tokgj uoksn; fo|ky;] Nku] ds izkpk;Z
}kjk fnukad 27-12-1996 dks fuxZr izek.k&i= esa fnukad 13-7-
1996 ls 60 #- izfrfnu dh nj ls izkFkhZ ds pkyd ds :Ik esa
dk;Zjr jgus dk mYys[k fd;k x;k gSA mDr izek.k&i= dk
mYys[k izkFkhZ us vius 'kiFk&i= esa fd;k gS rFkk fu;qfDr dh
frfFk dk Hkh mYys[k fd;k gSA foi{k dh rjQ ls mDr izek.k&i=
ftlesa ;kph ds fnukad 13-7-96 ls MªkbZoj ds :Ik esa dk;Z djus
dk mYys[k gS] mlds fo#) ,slh dksbZ lkjoku izfrijh{kk ugha
dh xbZ gS ftlds vkèkkj ij mDr izek.k&i= dks lkjghu ;k
xyr ekuk tk,A izfrijh{kk esa izkFkhZ us izkjEHk esa gh ;g mYys[k
fd;k gS fd fnukad 13-7-96 dks mldh fu;qfDr fizfUliy]
fllksfn;k }kjk dh x;h FkhA izn’kZ&3 Hkh Jh th-,l- fllksfn;k]
izkpk;Z }kjk fuxZr dh x;h gSA mDr m)`r izys[kksa rFkk mHk;
i{kksa ds lk{;ksa dh izfrijh{kk ds lE;d voyksdu ,oa fo’ys"k.k
ls eSa bl fu"d"kZ ij gw¡ fd izkFkhZ fd fu;qfDr foi{kh laLFkku esa
fnukad 13-7-96 dks gqbZ FkhA
6298
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
38-
Tkgk¡ rd izkFkhZ }kjk fnukad 13-7-96 ls 14-7-2005 rd
dk;Zjr jgus dk iz’u gS vkSj ,d o"kZ esa 240 fnu rd dk;Zjr
jgus dk iz’u gS bl lUnHkZ esa izkFkhZ ds fo}ku vfèkoDrk dh rjQ
ls ;g cgl dh x;h gS fd izkFkhZ us o"kZ esa 240 fnu fu;fer :Ik
ls dk;Z fd;k gS] ;g cgl Hkh dh x;h gS fd foi{k }kjk lEcfUèkr
vfHkys[k izLrqr ugha fd, x, gSa ftlls izkFkhZ ds fujUrj dk;Z
djus ds lEcUèk esa tkudkjh fey lds vr% bl lEcUèk esa foi{k
ds fo#) U;k;kfèkdj.k }kjk izfrdwy voèkkj.kk xzg.k djuh
pkfg,A bl lEcUèk esa ;kph i{k }kjk fofèkd n`"VkUr 2007 ,-
vkbZ-vkj-] ,l-lh-MCY;w- i`"B 1712 eSllZ Jhjke b.MLVªh;y
,UVjizkbtst cuke egd flag ,oa vU; dk voyEc fy;k x;k
gSA blds fo#) foi{khx.k fo}ku vfèkoDrk dh rjQ ls ;g
cgl dh x;h gS fd izkFkhZ us ,d o"kZ rd fujUrj dk;Z fd;k
gS vkSj ,d o"kZ dh vofèk esa 240 fnu dk;Z vofèk jgh gS] bl
rF; dks fl) djus dk Hkkj Loa; ;kph i{k ij gSA foi{k }kjk
vius leFkZu esa fofèkd n`"VkUr jsUt QkWjsLV vkWfQlj cuke ,l-
Vh- gkfnekuh dk voyEc fy;k x;k gS ;g cgl Hkh dh x;h gS
fd ;kph }kjk eqdnesa ds nkSjku izkFkhZ dh vkosnu fnukafdr
11-11-2010 ds vuqlkj tks vfHkys[k dk;Z djus dh vofèk ds
lEcUèk esa ekaxs x;s gSa og foi{k }kjk i=koyh ij izLrqr dj fn;s
x;s gSa vkSj foi{k }kjk izLrqr vfHkys[kksa esa izkFkhZ ds dk;Z djus
vkSj Hkqxrku ds lEcUèk esa tks fooj.k vafdr gS mlds vfrfjDr
izkFkhZ us foi{kh ds ;gka dk;Z ugha fd;kA tgk¡ rd izkFkhZ ds
vkosnu fnukad 11-11-2010 esa ;kfpr vfHkys[kksa dk iz’u gS bl
lUnHkZ esa mYys[kuh; gS fd izkFkhZ us ;g ekax dh gS fd og
fnukad 13-7-96 ls 15-7-2005 rd fujUrj dk;Zjr jgk gS vkSj
,d dSys.Mj o"kZ esa 240 fnu dke fd;k gS rFkk mldh gktjh
foi{khx.k }kjk ykWx&cqd esa dh tkrh Fkh tks foi{khx.k ds dCts
esa jgrh Fkh vkSj izkFkhZ dks ekfld osru okmPkj }kjk fn;k tkrk
Fkk] vr% ykWx&cqd vkSj okmpj foi{k }kjk U;k;ky; ds le{k
izLrqr djk;k tk,A bl vkosnu ds vuqikyu esa fnukad
21-2-2011 dks foi{k }kjk vfHkys[k izLrqr fd;k x;k gS vkSj izkFkhZ
ds fo}ku izfrfufèk }kjk fnukad 9-8-2011 dks U;k;kfèkdj.k ds
le{k ;g Lohdkj fd;k x;k gS fd izkFkhZ }kjk okfUNr nLrkost
fnukad 06&04&11 dks izLrqr dj fn;k x;k gSA izkFkhZ i{k }kjk
izLrqr vfHkys[kksa ds fo#) dksbZ vkifRr ugha fd x;h gS fd dksbZ
okfUNr vfHkys[k foi{k }kjk jksd j[kk x;k gSA fnukad 21-2-11]
26-4-2011 vkSj fnukad 9-8-2011 ds vkns’k rkfydk ds voyksdu
ls mDr rF; Li"V gSA mDr rF; ,oa ifjfLFkfr esa izkFkhZ i{k
ds fy, ;g dgus ds fy, dksbZ xqUtkb’k ugha gS fd foi{k us
izkFkhZ dh mifLFkfr] dk;Z djus ds vofèk vFkok Hkqxrku ls
lEcfUèkr okfUNr vfHkys[k ugha izLrqr fd, gSa vkSj mUgsa jksd
j[kk gSA tgka rd ykWx&cqd izLrqr djus dk iz’u gS Hkqxrku
dk fooj.k ;g n’kkZrk gS fd Hkqxrku gsrq dk;Z fnolksa dk
vkx.ku ykWx&cqd ij gh vkèkkfjr gS ftldh iqf"V vfHkys[k
bZ-,e-&4 ls gksrh gSA
39-
foi{k dh rjQ ls izkFkhZ }kjk foi{k ds laLFkku esa dk;Z
djus ls lEcfUèkr tks mifLFkfr iaftdk vkSj Hkqxrku fooj.k ,oa
okmpj izLrqr fd;k x;k gS og fuEu izdkj gS % &
ekg
dk;Z fd, x,
vuqifLFkr
fnukas dh la[;k
$ vodk’k
13 ls 31 tqykbZ 96
15 $ 4 ¾ 19
vxLr 96
27 $ 4 ¾ 31
flrEcj 96
25 $ 5 ¾ 30
vDVwcj 96
27 $ 4 ¾ 31
uoEcj 96
26 $ 4 ¾ 30
fnlEcj 96
26 $ 5 ¾ 31
tuojh 97
04 $ 0 ¾ 4
Qjojh ls 7 fnlEcj 97
-------------------------
vuqifLFkr
fnlEcj 97
21 $ 3 ¾ 24
tuojh 98 ls Qjojh 98
-------------------------
vuqifLFkr
ekpZ 98
24 $ 6 ¾ 30
vizsy 98
25 $ 5 ¾ 30
ebZ 98 ls 17 vxLr 98
-------------------------
vuqifLFkr
vxLr 98
12 $ 2 ¾ 14
4]7]8]9]13]17]20]30 flrEcj 98
22 $ 2 ¾ 24
vDVwcj o uoEcj 98
-------------------------
vuqifLFkr
fnlEcj 98
23 $ 2 ¾ 25 6 fnu
tuojh 99
26 $ 5 ¾ 31
Qjojh 99
24 $ 4 ¾ 28
ekpZ 99
25 $ 6 ¾ 31
vizsy 99 ls Qjojh 2003
-------------------------
vuqifLFkr
ekpZ 2003
3 $ 0 ¾ 3
28 fnu
vizsy 03 ls fnlEcj 04
-------------------------
vuqifLFkr
tuojh 2005
04 $ 00 ¾ 4 fnu
Qjojh 05
-------------------------
vuqifLFkr
ekpZ 05
02 $ 00 ¾ 2 fnu
vizSy 05
01 $ 00 ¾ 1 fnu
ebZ 05
05 $ 00 ¾ 5 fnu
twu 05
-------------------------
vuqifLFkr
tqykbZ 05
14 $ 00 ¾ 14 fnu
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6299
¼ekpZ 99 rd fooj.k gkftjh jftLVj ij vkèkkfjr gS rFkk 'ks"k
Hkqxrku okmpj ij vkèkkfjr gSA ftl ekg esa vodk’k ds fnu
dk;Z fnolksa dh la[;k esa ugha tksM+k x;k gS ml ekg esa vkosnd
dh gkftjh yxkrkj ugha gS vFkok cgqr de jgh gSA½
40-
izkFkhZ }kjk Loa; lgk;d Je vk;qDr egksn; ¼dsUnzh;½]
dksVk ds le{k vius dk;Z vofèk dk fooj.k izLrqr fd;k x;k
gS tks LokHkkfod :Ik ls izkFkhZ dks Lohdkj gSA ;g vkosnu
fnukafdr 6-2-2006 gS ftlesa izkFkhZ us dk;Z vofèk dk fooj.k
fuEu izdkj fn;k gS %&
** ;g fd vizkFkhZ chp&chp esa izkFkhZ dks dk;Z ugha nsrk Fkk
ijUrq izkFkhZ us 12 dyS.Mj ekg esa 240 fnu dk;Z fd;k gS dk;Z
dk fooj.k tks izkFkhZ ds ikl miyCèk gS fuEu izdkj gS%&
13&7&96 ls 2&1&97
3&3&03 ls 8&3&03
25&5&05
10&12&97 ls 30&5&98
26&3&03 ls 30&3&03
8&6&05
31&7&98 ls 15&10&98
21&8&03 ls 22&8&03
22&6&05 ls
14&7&05
7&12&98 ls 17&3&99
26&6&04 ls 3&1&05
23&4&99 ls 28&4&99
6&1&05 ls 14&3&05
31&5&99 ls 9&6&99
2&4&05 ls 12&5&05
41-
2007 ,-vkbZ-vkj-] ,l-lh-MCY;w- i`"B 1712 eSllZ Jhjke
b.MLVªh;y ,UVjizkbtst cuke egd flag ,oa vU; esa 240 fnu
dh vofèk dh lsok dks lkfcr djus ,oa izfrdwy voèkkj.kk xzg.k
djus ds lEcUèk esa ekuuh; loksZPp U;k;ky; us fu.kZ; ds izLrj
32] 33] o 34 esa ;g voèkkfjr fd;k gS %&
**32- The said approach in our view was erroneous in
view of the decision of this Court in the case of U.P.
Drugs and Pharmaceuticals Company Ltd. (Supra).
The petitioner had wrongly described the documents
relating to attendance for the years 1991 onwards as
far as the respondents are concerned, as being
irrelevant and the Tribunal has also accepted the
said reasoning. Consequently, instead of drawing
an adverse presumption for non-production of the
said records, the Tribunal accepted the contention
of the petitioner that the workmen had not worked
for more than 240 days in the year preceding the date
of their termination nor had the workmen filed any
proof to show otherwise.
33. In our view, the High Court adopted the correct
approach while deciding the controversy between
the parties upon a correct understanding of the law
as contained in Section 6 N read with Section 2 (g) of
the U.P. Act which is applicable to these petitions.
34. Having correctly interpreted the provisions of
Section 6 N of the U.P. Act, the High Court rightly
drew an adverse presumption for non-production of
the attendance Registers and the Muster Roll for the
years 1991 onwards. The best evidence having been
withheld, the High Court was entitled to draw such
adverse inference. The view expressed by this Court
on the question of burden of proof in Range Forest
Officer’s case (supra) were watered down by the
subsequent decision in R.M. Yellatty’s case (supra)
and in our view the workmen had discharged their
initial onus by production of the document in their
possession”.
42-
tgka rd orZeku ekeys esa foi{khx.k ds fo#) èkkjk 114
Hkkjrh; lk{; vfèkfu;e ds vUrxZr izfrdwy voèkkj.kk xzg.k
fd, tkus dk iz’u gS bl lUnHkZ esa mYys[kuh; gS fd U;k;kfèkdj.k
ds le{k vfHkys[kksa dh izLrqfr ls lEcfUèkr ;kph dh ekax vkSj
foi{kh }kjk dh x;h iwfrZ ds ckn dksbZ vkifÙk ugha dh x;h gS
fd veqd vofèk ds fy, gkftjh jftLVj vFkok Hkqxrku okmpj
foi{kh }kjk izLrqr ugha fd;k x;k gS cfYd rRdkyhu fo}ku
ihBklhu vfèkdkjh us vkns’k fnukad 9-8-2011 esa ;g mYys[k
fd;k gS fd izkFkhZ ds izfrfufèk dk dguk gS fd izkFkhZ }kjk okfUNr
nLrkost fnukad 6-4-2011 ¼lgh frfFk 21-2-11½ dks izLrqr gks
pqdh gSA bl lEcUèk esa fnuakd 9-8-2011 ds vkns’k dks bl Lrj
ij m)`r djuk eSa vko’;d le>rk gw¡ tks fuEuor gS % &
**mHk;i{k ds izfrfufèkx.k mifLFkrA izkFkhZ us fnukad
11-11-2010 dks ,d vkosnu vizkFkhZ ls nLrkostkr izLrqr djokus
gsrq izLrqr fd;kA izkFkhZ ds izfrfufèkx.k dk dguk gS fd izkFkhZ
}kjk okfUNr nLrkostkr fnukad 6-4-2011 dks is’k gks pqds gSaA
vr% mDr izkFkZuk&i= dk fuLrkj.k mDr izdkj fd;k tkrk gSA
izkFkhZ dk 'kiFk&i= lk{; esa izLrqr fd;kA izfr vizkFkhZ dks
izfr nh xbZA ftjg gsrq volj pkgkA i=koyh okLrs ftjg
fnukad 29-9-2011 dks is’k gksA**
43-
1963 ii L.L.J. i`"B 367] ,l-lh-lh- ¼iw.kZihB½ lwj bukesy
,.M LVSfEiax oDlZ fyfeVsM cuke deZpkjhx.k esa ekuuh;
loksZPp U;k;ky; us vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèkfu;e 1947 dh èkkjk
25&ch ,oa 25&,Q dh O;k[;k djrs gq, ;g voèkkfjr fd;k gS
fd ¼,d o"kZ yxkrkj lsok½ ls ;g rkRi;Z gS fd iwjh ,d dSys.Mj
o"kZ ls de lsok vofèk ugha gksuh pkfg, vkSj deZpkjh us ;fn
dsoy X;kjg ekg rd lsok dh gS ftlesa mlus 240 fnu ls Hkh
T;knk dk;Z dj fy;k gS rks Hkh ,slh fLFkfr esa og èkkjk 25&,Q
vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèkfu;e ds ykHk dk gdnkj ugha gksxkA
44-
jsUt QkWjsLV vkWfQlj cuke ,l- Vh- gkfnekuh esa ekuuh;
loksZPp U;k;ky; us fu.kZ; ds izLrj 3 esa ;g voèkkfjr fd;k
gS “ In our opinion the tribunal was not right in placing the
onus on the management without first determining on the
basis of cogent evidence that the respondent had worked
for more than 240 days in the year preceding his termination.
It was the case of the claimant that he had so worked but
this claim was denied by the appellant. It was then for the
claimant to lead evidence to show that he had in fact worked
6300
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
for 240 days in the year preceding his termination. Filing of
an affidavit is only his own statement in his favour and
that cannot be regarded as sufficient evidence for any court
or tribunal to come to the conclusion that a workman had,
in fact, worked for 240 days in a year. No proof of receipt of
salary or wages for 240 days or order or record of
appointment or engagement for this period was produced
by the workman. On this ground alone, the award is liable
to be set aside”.
45-
foi{khx.k dh rjQ ls mDr n`"VkUr bl lUnHkZ esa izLrqr
fd;k x;k gS fd izkFkhZ us dSys.Mj o"kZ esa 240 fnu fujUrj dk;Z
fd;k gS bl rF; dks fl) djus dk Hkkj Loa; ;kph i{k ij gS
izkFkhZ i{k dh rjQ ls eSllZ Jhjke b.MLVªh;y ,UVjizkbtst
cuke egd flag ,oa vU; dk n`"VkUr izkFkhZ i{k dh rjQ ls bl
mn~ns’; ds fy, izLrqr fd;k x;k gS fd foi{kh ds fo#)
vfHkys[k izLrqr u fd;k tkus ds lUnHkZ esa ;kph ds i{k esa 240
fnu fujUrj dk;Z djus ds lEcUèk esa izfrdwy voèkkj.kk xzg.k
dh tk;A eSllZ Jhjke b.MLVªh;y izkbosV fyfeVsM cuke
egd flag ,oa vU; ds ekeys esa izR;FkhZx.k us viuh ;kfpdk esa
;g mYys[k fd;k fd os 1987 ls 1991 ds chp fu;qDr gq, vkSj
fu;qfDr dh frfFk ls ysdj NaVuh rd Øe’k% lu~ 1994 ,oa
1995 rd dk;Z fd;kA ;kphx.k dk dFku Fkk ;|fi mUgksaus ,d
dSys.Mj o"kZ esa 240 fnu ls T;knk dke fd;k] fQj Hkh mudh
NaVuh voSèkkfud rjhds ls èkkjk 2 ¼th½ mRrj izns’k vkS|ksfxd
fookn vfèkfu;e 1947 ds izkoèkku ds fo#) dh x;hA izR;FkhZx.k
dh dqy la[;k 5 Fkh ftuls lEcfUèkr 5 fookn U;k;kfèkdj.k dks
fu.k;kFkZ izsf"kr fd;s x;sA izR;FkhZx.k dh rjQ ls ;g Hkh dgk
x;k Fkk fd mUgsa xzsM uEcj] izkWfoMs.V Q.M uEcj dk vkcaVu
gqvk FkkA lsok lEcUèkh vU; lqfoèkk,¡ Lohdkj dh x;h Fkh vkSj
mUgksaus lsok lEcUèkh vU; ykHk dh ek¡x dh] ftlds fy, os
gdnkj Fks] blfy, mudh lsok,¡ fcuk fdlh izdkj dh uksfVl
fn, lekIr dj nh x;hA ;kph ¼izcUèku½ dk dFku Fkk fd phuh
m|ksx ,d ekSleh m|ksx gS vkSj dk;Z esa layXu vfèkdka’k
deZpkfj;ksa dh fu;qfDr vkdfLed ,oa vLFkk;h izd`fr dh gSA
izcUèku dh rjQ ls ;g Hkh dgk x;k fd okLrfod fookn lsok
dh lekfIr dk ugha Fkk cfYd izR;FkhZx.k dh fu;fefrdj.k dk
Fkk ,oa izR;FkhZx.k dh lsok,¡ dHkh lekIr ugha dh x;h] D;ksafd
fdlh Hkh izR;FkhZ us dfFkr lsok lekfIr fd frfFk ds Bhd iwoZ 12
eghuksa esa 240 fnu dke ugha fd;kA izR;FkhZx.k us vius leFkZu
esa cksul iphZ] osru iphZ] izkfoMs.V ls lEcfUèkr dVkSrh dh iphZ]
fofHkUu efguksa ls lEcfUèkr mifLFkfr dkMZ vkSj vU; miyCèk
vfHkys[k izLrqr fd;k Fkk vkSj izcUèku ls mifLFkfr iaftdk]
cksul Hkqxrku ls lEcfUèkr vfHkys[k vkSj viuh lsok ls lEcfUèkr
vU; vfHkys[k izLrqr djus dh izkFkZuk dh FkhA izcUèku }kjk lsok
lekfIr ds Bhd iwoZ 12 eghus dh vofèk ¼,d dSys.Mj o"kZ½ dh
mifLFkfr iaftdk ls lEcfUèkr vfHkys[k izLrqr fd;k x;k Fkk]
ftlls ;g tkfgj Fkk fd ml vofèk esa fdlh Hkh deZpkjh }kjk
240 fnu dke ugha fd;k x;k FkkA izcUèku }kjk 'ks"k foxr vofèk
dh mifLFkfr iaftdk u izLrqr djus dk dksbZ vdkV~; dkj.k
ugha n’kkZ;k x;k FkkA izR;FkhZx.k dks U;k;kfèkdj.k }kjk f}rh;d
lk{; izLrqr djus dh vuqefr iznku dh x;hA U;k;kfèkdj.k us
izR;FkhZx.k dh ;kfpdk,¡ bl vkèkkj ij fujLr dh] fd fdlh Hkh
izR;FkhZ us ,d dSys.Mj o"kZ esa 240 fnu lsok ugha dhA izcUèku
}kjk mifLFkfr ls lEcfUèkr 'ks"k vofèk ls lEcfUèkr vfHkys[k u
izLrqr djus ds fcUnqvksa ij U;k;kfèkdj.k }kjk bl vkèkkj ij
fo’ks"k egRo ugha fn;k x;k fd izcUèku }kjk vLFkk;h deZpkfj;ksa
ls lEcfUèkr ,sls vfHkys[kksa dk j[k&j[kko ugha fd;k tkrkA
46-
mRrj izns’k vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèkfu;e dh èkkjk 2&th esa
;g izkfoèkku gS fd lsok lekfIr fd frfFk ds Bhd iwoZ dSys.Mj
o"kZ esa 240 fnu dh lsok djus dh ctk;] fdlh Hkh dSys.Mj o"kZ
esa lsok ds nkSjku ;fn deZpkjh us 240 fnu dh lsok dh gS rks
mldh NaVuh fcuk uksfVl fn;s ugha dh tk ldrhA rn~uqlkj
U;k;kfèkdj.k ds fu.kZ; ds fo#) izR;FkhZx.k us ekuuh; mPp
U;k;ky; ds le{k vyx&vyx fjV ;kfpdk,¡ izLrqr dhA
izcUèku }kjk dsoy lsok lekfIr dh frfFk ds Bhd iwoZ dSys.Mj
o"kZ dh mifLFkfr iaftdk izLrqr dh x;h Fkh vkSj 'ks"k vofèk ls
lEcfUèkr iaftdk izLrqr ugha dh x;h Fkh ftl vofèk esa izR;FkhZx.k
us lsok dh FkhA èkkjk 6&,u ds izkfoèkku ds vuqlkj 240 fnu dh
lsok fdlh Hkh dSys.Mj o"kZ esa èkkjk 2&th ds mn~ns’; ds fy,
i;kZIr FkhA vr% 'ks"k vofèk ls lEcfUèkr vfHkys[kksa ds izLrqr u
gksus ds dkj.k ekuuh; mPp U;k;ky; us Hkkjrh; lk{; vfèkfu;e
1872 dh èkkjk 114 ds vUrxZr izcUèku ds fo#) izfrdwy
voèkkj.kk xzg.k dh rFkk lHkh fjV ;kfpdk,¡ Lohdkj dh] ftlds
fo#) ;kph us ekuuh; loksZPp U;k;ky; ds le{k fo’ks"k
vuqefr ;kfpdk izLrqr dhA ekuuh; loksZPp U;k;ky; ds le{k
;kph }kjk jsUt vkWfQlj cuke gkfnekuh lfgr vusd fofèkd
n`"VkUrksa dk voyEc fy;k x;kA ekuuh; loksZPp U;k;ky; us
;kph dh ;kfpdk fujLr dh vkSj fu.kZ; ds izLrj 34 esa ;g
voèkkfjr fd;k %&
34. Having correctly interpreted the provisions of
Section 6 N of the U.P. Act, the High Court rightly
drew an adverse presumption for non-production of
the attendance Registers and the Muster Roll for the
years 1991 onwards. The best evidence having been
withheld, the High Court was entitled to draw such
adverse inference. The view expressed by this Court
on the question of burden of proof in Range Forest
Officer’s case (supra) were watered down by the
subsequent decision in R.M. Yellatty’s case (supra)
and in our view the workmen had discharged their
initial onus by production of the document in their
possession”.
47-
orZeku izdj.k esa fnukad 9-8-2011 ds vkns’kkuqlkj izkFkhZ
i{k us Loa; Lohdkj fd;k gS fd okfUNr vfHkys[k ftldh ek¡x
izkFkhZ i{k }kjk dh x;h gS og is’k gks pqds gSa ftldk rkRi;Z ;g
gS fd foi{khx.k ds dCts esa dksbZ vfHkys[k 'ks"k ugha jg x;k gS
ftls izLrqr gksus dh izkFkhZ i{k dks vis{kk gksA i=koyh ij
miyCèk izkFkhZ i{k dh vkosnu ds vuqikyu esa foi{kh dh rjQ
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6301
ls izLrqr vfHkys[k ds voyksdu ls ;g Li"V gS fd fu;qfDr dh
frfFk ls tqykbZ 2005 rd ds Hkqxrku okmpj ,oa mifLFkfr
iaftdk dh izfr izLrqr dh x;h gSA izkFkhZ i{k }kjk eSllZ Jhjke
b.MLVªh;y ,UVjizkbZtst cuke egd flag ,oa vU; ds ekeys
ls dksbZ enn yh tk ldrh gS] D;ksafd mDr ekeys eas foi{k us
dsoy lsokeqfDr ds Bhd iwoZ ,d lky dh vofèk dh mifLFkfr
iaftdk dk fooj.k izLrqr fd;k Fkk tcfd m- iz- vkS|ksfxd
fookn vfèkfu;e dh èkkjk 2 ¼th½ ds izkfoèkku esa **iwoZorhZ** 'kCn
dk yksi gksus ds dkj.k fdlh dyS.Mj o"kZ esa deZdkj dh 240
fnu dh lsok **yxkrkj lsok** ds mn~ns’; ls Ik;kZIr FkhA 'ks"k
vofèk ds vfHkys[k foi{k }kjk izLrqr ugha fd;s x;s Fks] vr%
ekuuh; mPp U;k;ky; us foi{k ds fo:) izfrdwy voèkkj.kk
xzg.k dh FkhA orZeku ekeys esa foi{k us vfHkys[k fu;qfDr ls
ysdj lsok lekfIr rd izLrqr fd;s gS] vr% èkkjk 114 Hkkjrh;
lk{; vfèkfu;e ds vUrxZr izkFkhZ ds i{k esa foi{khx.k ds fo:)
izfrdwy voèkkj.kk xzg.k djus ds dksbZ fofèkd fLFkfr mRiUu ugha
gksrh] vr% eSa bl fu"d"kZ ij gw¡ fd orZeku ekeys dh rF; ,oa
ifjfLFkfr esa izkFkhZ gfjizlkn tks’kh dks èkkjk 25&¼,Q½ vkS|ksfxd
fookn vfèkfu;e dk ykHk ugha izkIr gks ldrkA
48-
tgka rd izkFkhZ dh fu;qfDr dh izÑfr dk iz’u gS] ;kfpdk
esa mlds }kjk dgk x;k gS fd mldh fu;qfDr fjDr LFkku ij
gqbZ Fkh] ysfdu mls dksbZ fu;qfDr i= ugha feyk Fkk ftl rF;
dks oknksÙkj esa bUdkj fd;k x;k gS vkSj dgk x;k gS fd dk;Z
dh miyCèkrk ds dkj.k rnFkZ vkèkkj ij nSfud osru Hkksxh ds
:Ik esa mls fu;ksftr fd;k x;k Fkk vkSj fof’k"V :Ik ls ;g
mYys[k Hkh fd;k x;k gS fd mldh fu;qfDr fdlh in ij ugha
dh x;h FkhA izkpk;Z] Jh lqèkhj pUn è;kuh us vius 'kiFk&i=
esa mDr rF; dks nksgjk;k gSA fu;qfDr fn;s tkus ds lEcUèk esa
izfrijh{kk esa izkFkhZ us i`"B 1 ij Lohdkj fd;k gS fd izkpk;Z] us
ekSf[kd :Ik ls mls cqyk;k Fkk vkSj izkFkhZ ls fy[kok;k Fkk fd lgh
<ax ls dke djsaxs vkSj ;g fy[kok;k gqvk dkxt mUgha ds ikl
gSA ;g Hkh dgk gS fd jkstxkj dk;kZy; ls pkyd gsrq dksbZ lwph
ugha eaxokbZ FkhA ;g Hkh dgk gS fd izkpk;Z ftUgksusa izkFkhZ dks
fu;qDr fd;k muls izkFkhZ dh dksbZ O;fDrxr tkudkjh ugha gS
vkSj fo|ky; ds gh ,d fyfid izkFkhZ dks ysdj x;s Fks ysfdu
muds uke dk è;ku ugha gSA Hkqxrku ds lEcUèk esa foi{k }kjk
i=koyh ij izLrqr fooj.k ls ;g fofnr gksrk gS fd izkFkhZ tqykbZ
1996 ls 60 #- nSfud etnwjh ij fu;qDr fd;k x;k Fkk vkSj
;g nj ekpZ 1999 rd fo|eku FkhA blds ckn ekpZ 2003 esa
izkFkhZ dks 75 #- izfrfnu dh nj ls Hkqxrku fd;k x;k gS vkSj
tuojh 2005 ls lsokeqfDr rd 100 #- izfrfnu dh nj ls
Hkqxrku fd;k x;k gSA ebZ 2005 vkSj tqykbZ 05 ds Hkqxrku ds
fooj.k ls ;g tkfgj gS fd ebZ 05 esa fo|ky; ds okgu pkyd
ds vodk’k ij gksus ds dkj.k vkSj tqykbZ 05 esa fo|ky; ds
okgu pkyd ds t;iqj {ks=h; dk;kZy; esa vLFkk;h :Ik ls M;wVh
ij gksus ds dkj.k ml vofèk esa izkFkhZ dks dk;Z fn;k x;k gSA
mDr vofèk ds fy;s Hkqxrku ij izkFkhZ ds gLrk{kj gS ftl
vfHkys[k esa mDr ckr vafdr gS fd fo|ky; ds okgu pkyd
ds Øe’k% vodk’k ,oa t;iqj dk;kZy; esa M;wVh ij gksus ds
dkj.k izkFkhZ dks dk;Z ij j[kk x;k gSA izkpk;Z ds 'kiFk&i= ds
izLrj 3 esa mDr fu;qfDr dh izd`fr dk mYys[k gSA izfrijh{kk
esa Hkh izkpk;Z us dgk gS fd izkFkhZ us 2005 esa vfUre :Ik ls dke
fd;k Fkk vkSj izkFkhZ dks chp&chp esa cqykrs jgrs FksA izkFkhZ us Hkh
izfrijh{kk esa i`"B 2 ij ;g mYys[k fd;k gS fd fnukad
13-7-96 ls 22-2-99 rd mlus yxkrkj dke fd;k Fkk vkSj ,d
o"kZ esa 240 fnu ls vfèkd dke fd;k Fkk ysfdu bl rF; dk
leFkZu mlds le>kSrk vfèkdkjh ds le{k 6-2-06 ds vkosnu ls
ugha gksrk gSA vkxs ;g dgk gS fd og lu~ 1999 ls 2003 ds chp
dke fd;k Fkk rFkk lu~ 2003 esa fdrus fnu dk;Z fd;k og ugha
crk ldrkA ;kfpdk esa izkFkhZ us dgk gS fd mls 09-8-99 dks
foi{kh us dk;Z nsuk cUn dj fn;k vkSj i`"B 3 ij lk{; esa ;g
dgk gS fd 9-8-99 dks foi{kh us mls lsokeqDr ugha fd;k cfYd
22-2-99 dks lsok eqDr fd;kA ;kfpdk esa vUrr% 15-7-2005 dks
vfUre ckj dk;ZeqDr gksus dk mYys[k gS ijUrq lk{; esa dgk gS
fd mls è;ku ugha gS fd 15-7-99 dks mls lsokeqDr fd;k x;k
;k ughaA izkFkhZ dh ;kfpdk esa ,slk dksbZ mYys[k ugha gS fd mlus
13-7-96 ls 22-2-99 rd yxkrkj dke fd;k cfYd ;g mYys[k
gS fd tc 9-8-99 rd ,d dSys.Mj o"kZ esa 240 fnu ls vfèkd
dk;Z dj fy;k rks foi{kh us dk;Z nsuk cUn dj fn;kA bl izdkj
izkFkhZ dh ;kfpdk ds dFku vkSj izfrijh{kk esa vk;s lk{; rFkk
izLrqr 'kiFk&i= ds lk{; esa dksbZ lkE;rk ugha gSA blls ;g
fu"d"kZ fudyrk gS fd izkFkhZ }kjk ;kfpdk ds dFku dks lkfcr
ugha fd;k x;k gSA foi{khx.k }kjk izkFkhZ ds dk;Z vofèk ds lEcUèk
esa tqykbZ 1996 ls ysdj tqykbZ 2005 rd ds izLrqr fooj.k ls
;g fu"d"kZ fudyrk gS fd izkFkhZ us dk;ZeqfDr fd frfFk fnukad
15-7-2005 ds Bhd iwoZ dSys.Mj o"kZ esa 240 fnu dk;Z ugha fd;k
gSA ;kph us Loa; fnukad 6-2-2006 ds vkosnu esa viuh dk;Z
vofèk dk tks mijksDr fooj.k izLrqr fd;k gS mlls Hkh lsokeqfDr
dh frfFk ds Bhd iwoZ dSys.Mj o"kZ esa 240 fnu dk;Z djus dh
iqf"V ugha gksrh gSA lk{; dh mDr O;k[;k ls ;g Hkh fu"d"kZ
fudyrk gS fd ;kph dh fu;qfDr fd izd`fr nSfud osru Hkksxh
FkhA
49-
izkFkhZ ds fo}ku vfèkoDrk dh rjQ ls ;g cgl fd x;h
gS fd foi{k }kjk izkFkhZ dks lsok ls gVkus ds ckn foi{kh us nwljs
vU; O;fDr;ksa dks dke fn;k tcfd izkFkhZ ls dfu"d O;fDr lsok
esa cus jgs] bl izdkj izkFkhZ dks foi{k }kjk volj ugha fn;k x;k]
ftlls èkkjk 25&th ,oa èkkjk 25&,p dk mYya?ku gqvk gSA
fyf[kr cgl ds izLrj 11 esa mDr ckr dgh x;h gS vkSj bl
lEcUèk esa 2005 osLVuZ ykW dslst ¼jktLFkku½] ;w-lh-] i`"B 737]
jktLFkku mPp U;k;ky; ¼t;iqj [k.M+ihB½] Mk;jsDVj nwjn’kZu
dsUnz cuke fn tt] dsUnzh; vfèkdj.k ,oa vU; ds n`"VkUr dk
voyEc fy;k x;k gS] blds fo:) foi{kh ds fo}ku vfèkoDrk
6302
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
dh rjQ ls ;g cgl dh x;h gS fd izkFkhZ dks dHkh fu;qfDr ugha
nh x;h vkSj tc dk;Z dh vko’;drk gksrh Fkh rks mls cqyk;k
tkrk Fkk blfy;s izkFkhZ dks fu;qfDr nsus vFkok gVkus dk iz’u
ugha mBrk gSA ;g cgl Hkh fd x;h gS fd izkFkhZ ds ekeys esa
foi{khx.k }kjk èkkjk 25&th ,oa èkkjk 25&,p dk mYya?ku ugha
fd;k x;k rFkk izkFkhZ nSfud osru Hkksxh deZpkjh gS ftls dsoy
dk;Z dh miyCèkrk gksus ij gh j[kk tkrk Fkk vkSj ftrus fnu
dk;Z djrk Fkk mrus fnu dh etnwjh nh tkrh Fkh] blfy;s Hkh
èkkjk 25&th ,oa èkkjk 25&,p dk mYya?ku dk iz’u ugha mBrk
gSA Mk;jsDVj nwjn’kZu dsUnz cuke fn tt] dsUnzh; vfèkdj.k
,oa vU; esa ekuuh; mPp U;k;ky; us ;g voèkkfjr fd;k gS
fd ;fn deZdkj us dsoy 95 fnu dh lsok dh gS rks og èkkjk
25&,Q vkS|ksfxd fookn vfèkfu;e ds vUrxZr miyCèk ykHk
dk gdnkj ugha gS] ysfdu ;fn deZdkj dh rqyuk esas mlls
dfu"B deZpkjh lsok esa j[kk x;k gS rks ,slh fLFkfr esa ml
deZdkj dh lsok lekfIr dk vkns’k [kf.M+r fd;k tkuk fofèkd
laxr gS ftls dsoy 95 fnu gh lsok dh FkhA ekuuh; mPp
U;k;ky; us ;g Hkh voèkkfjr fd;k gS fd èkkjk 25&th ,o¡ èkkjk
25&,p dh O;oLFkk èkkjk 25&,Q dh O;oLFkk dh rqyuk esa fHkUu
,oa LorU= gS] ftldk rkRi;Z ;g gS fd ,d deZdkj èkkjk
25&,Q ds ykHk dk gdnkj ugha Hkh gS fQj Hkh èkkjk 25&th ,oa
èkkjk 25&,p dk mYya?ku gksus ij mlds vèkhu feyus okys
ykHk dk gdnkj gSA bl ekeysa esa izR;FkhZ deZpkjh 3-7-1987 dks
fu;qDr gqvk Fkk vkSj 31-10-87 rd lsok dh vkSj 1-11-87 dks
fcuk dksbZ dkj.k crk, mldh lsok lekIr dj nh x;h FkhA
fu;kstd }kjk tc IkzR;FkhZ dks gVk;k x;k rks ml le; dfu"B
deZpkjh dk;Zjr Fks vkSj bl ckr dk lk{; Fkk fd gVkus ds ckn
fu;kstd us nSfud etnwjh ij vU; yksxksa dks fu;ksftr fd;kA
mDr fLFkfr esa U;k;kfèkdj.k us izR;FkhZ dh lsok lekfIr dk
vkns’k fujLr fd;k ftlds fo:) ;kfpdk ekuuh; mPp
U;k;ky; }kjk fujLr dh x;hA
50-
izkFkhZ gfj izlkn tks’kh ds ekeys esa ;kfpdk ds izLrj 4
esa dgk x;k gS fd izkFkhZ dks gVkus ds ckn foi{kh u;k MªkbZoj
j[kdj pkyd dk dke djok jgk gS ftlls èkkjk 25&,p dk
mYya?ku gS] ysfdu ;kfpdk esa u;s pkyd dk uke rFkk mldh
fu;qfDr dh frfFk dk dksbZ mYys[k ugha gS dsoy èkkjk 25&,p
ds mYya?ku dk mYys[k gSA lk{; esa izLrqr 'kiFk&i= esa izkFkhZ
us ;g mYys[k fd;k gS fd dey dqekj ;ksxh iq= Jh Jo.k
dqekj ;ksxh dks foi{k us pkyd ds in ij j[k fy;k ysfdu
izkFkhZ dks ugha j[kkA dey dqekj ;ksxh dh fu;qfDr dh frfFk
'kiFk&i= esa vafdr ugha gSA bl lEcUèk esa dksbZ izys[kh; lk{;
;kph dh rjQ ls izLrqr ugha gSA bl lEcUèk esa foi{k }kjk
oknksÙkj esa bUdkj fd;k x;k gSA le>kSrk vfèkdkjh ds le{k
izLrqr izkFkhZ ds vkosnu fnukafdr 6-2-2006 ls ;g tkfgj gS fd
izkFkhZ uoksn; fo|ky; fljksgh esa MªkbZoj ds in ij lk{kkRdkj gsrq
vizSy 98 ds ckn fdlh le; mifLFkr gqvk Fkk ysfdu og
lQy ugha jgkA viuh izfrijh{kk esa dey dqekj ;ksxh dh
fu;qfDr ds lEcUèk esa izkFkhZ us dgk gS fd dey dqekj ;ksxh dh
fu;qfDr ds lEcUèk dksbZ vkns’k i=koyh ij izLrqr ugha fd;k gS
rFkk mls ;g Hkh è;ku ugha gS fd fdl izkpk;Z us dey dqekj
;ksxh dks ukSdjh nh FkhA bl lEcUèk esa izkpk;Z] Jh lqèkhj pUnz
è;kuh ds 'kiFk&i= esa fdlh dh fu;qfDr dk dksbZ mYys[k ugha
gS vkSj izkFkhZ ds lEcUèk esa dgk x;k gS fd mls iw.kZ :Ik ls rnFkZ
vkèkkj ij dk;Z dh miyCèkrk jgus rd nSfud osru Hkksxh ds
:Ik esa fu;fer deZpkjh ds miyCèk gksus rd fu;ksftr fd;k
x;k FkkA izfrijh{kk eas izkpk;Z us dey dqekj ;ksxh ds lEcUèk
esa ;g mYys[k fd;k gS fd mUgsa tkudkjh ugha gS dey dqekj
;ksxh dks izkFkhZ dh txg ckn esa j[kk x;k Fkk ;k ughaA izkFkhZ gfj
izlkn tks’kh ds lEcUèk esa izkpk;Z us dgk gS fd t:jr iM+us ij
gfj izlkn tks’kh dks dk;Z gsrq j[kk tkrk Fkk vkSj t:jr lekIr
gksus ij og [kqn gh pyk tkrk FkkA izkpkZ; us ;g Lohdkj fd;k
gS fd orZeku esa pkyd dk dke Bsdsnkj ds ekè;e ls dkUVªsDV
ds }kjk djok;k tkrk gSA mHk;i{k ds mDr lk{; ls izkFkhZ dh
txg fdlh vU; O;fDr dey dqekj ;ksxh dh fu;qfDr dh iq"Vh
ugha gksrhA vr% eS bl fu"d"kZ ij gw¡ fd izkFkhZ dks èkkjk 25&th
vFkok 25&,p ds vUrxZr fdlh izdkj dk ykHk iznku fd;k
tkus fd fofèkd fLFkfr miyCèk ugha gSA
51-
izkFkhZ dh rjQ ls izLrqr 2003 osLVuZ ykW dslst ¼jktLFkku½]
;w-lh- i`"B 523 jktLFkku mPp U;k;ky; ¼t;iqj [k.M+ihB½]
tujy eSustj cuke fn yscj dksVZ o vU; esa ekuuh; jktLFkku
mPp U;k;ky; ¼tksèkiqj½ ¼[k.M+ihB½ us ;g ;g voèkkfjr fd;k
gS fd ;fn deZdkj dh lsok lekfIr fofèk ekU; ugha gS rks
deZdkj dh lsok esa iqu% LFkkiuk foxr osru ds lkFk dh tkosxh]
tc rd dh fu;kstd ;g fl) u dj ns fd deZdkj dgha
vU;= ykHk lfgr fu;ksftr FkkA ekuuh; mPp U;k;ky; us ;g
Hkh voèkkfjr fd;k gS fd dsoy fuokZg ds fy;s deZdkj }kjk dqN
Hkh dk;Z dj ysuk ykHk lfgr fu;kstu ugha ekuk tk ldrkA
52-
2005 ¼4½ i`"B 90] osLVuZ ykW dslst] jktLFkku mPp
U;k;ky; ¼tksèkiqj½] ;wfu;u vkWQ bf.M+;k ,oa vU; cuke Je
U;k;ky; ,oa vU; ds ekeys esa Je U;k;ky; }kjk izR;FkhZ dh
;kfpdk Lohdkj dh x;h vkSj izR;FkhZ dh fofèk fo:) lsok
lekfIr fujLr dh x;h vkSj 50 izfr’kr foxr osru ds lkFk lsok
esa iquLFkkZfir djus dk vkns’k ikfjr fd;k x;kA izR;FkhZ }kjk
lsok lekfIr ds 11 lky ckn fookn mBk;k x;k FkkA Je
U;k;ky; ds fu.kZ; ds fo:) ekuuh; mPp U;k;ky; ds le{k
;kfpdk izLrqr dh x;h ftlesa ekuuh; mPp U;k;ky; us ;g
voèkkfjr fd;k fd Je U;k;ky; ds fu.kZ; esa dksbZ =qfV ;k
voSèkkfudrk ugha gSA ;kfpdk rn~uqlkj fujLr dh x;hA
53-
i{kdkjksa ds vfHkopuksa rFkk mlds leFkZu esa mHk;i{k
}kjk izLrqr lk{; ,oa fofèkd n`"VkUrksa dh mDr O;k[;k ,oa
fo’ys"k.k ds vkèkkj ij eSa bl fu"d"kZ ij gw¡ fd izkFkhZ gfj izlkn
tks’kh us 13-7-1996 fu;qfDr dh dfFkr frfFk vkSj lsoklekfIr dh
frfFk 14-7-2005 ds chp lsoklekfIr ds Bhd iwoZ ,d dSys.Mj
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6303
o"kZ dh vofèk esa 240 fnu dh fujUrj lsok fizfUliy] uoksn;
fo|ky;] xzke&Nku] ftyk&Vksad ds vèkhu ugha dh gS] rFkk
fizfUliy] uoksn; fo|ky; }kjk fnukad 15-7-2005 dks gfj
izlkn tks’kh dh lsok lekfIr oSèk ,o¡ mfpr gS vkSj deZdkj
fdlh vuqrks"k dk gdnkj ugha gSA U;k;fu.kZ;u gsrq izsf"kr funsZ’k
dk mRrj mDr izdkj fn;k tkrk gSA iapkV rn~uqlkj ikfjr
fd;k tkrk gSA
54-
iapkV dh izfrfyfi dsUnzh; ljdkj dks vkS|ksfxd fookn
vfèkfu;e 1947 dh èkkjk 17 ¼1½ ds vUrxZr izdk’kukFkZ izsf"kr dh
tk;A
Hkjr ik.Ms;] ihBklhu vfèkdkjh
ubZ fnYyh] 9 flrEcj] 2014
dk-vk- 2482-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947
dk 14) dh èkkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj eSllZ Hkkjr
bysDVªkWfuDl fyfeVsM ds izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds
deZdkjksa ds chp vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh;
ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vfèkdj.k ,oa Je U;k;ky;&1] paMhx<+ ds
iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 235@2013] 236@2013] 237@2013] 238@2013]
239@2013 vkSj 240@2013) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh;
ljdkj dks 8@9@2014 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
¹la- ,y&14012@48@2013&vkbZvkj (Mh;w)º
¹la- ,y&14012@49@2013&vkbZvkj (Mh;w)º
¹la- ,y&14012@50@2013&vkbZvkj (Mh;w)º
¹la- ,y&14012@51@2013&vkbZvkj (Mh;w)º
¹la- ,y&14012@52@2013&vkbZvkj (Mh;w)º
¹la- ,y&14012@53@2013&vkbZvkj (Mh;w)º
ih- osQ- os.kqxksiky] vuqHkkx vf/dkjh
New Delhi, the 9th September, 2014
S.O. 2482.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (I.D No. 235/
2013, 236/2013,237/2013,238/2013,239/2013 & 240/2013) of
the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour
Court No.1, Chandigarh now as shown in the Annexure in
the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation
to the management of the M/s. Bharat Electronics Limited
and their workmen, which was received by the Central
Government on 08/09/2014.
[No. L-14012/48/2013-IR (DU)]
[No. L-14012/49/2013-IR (DU)]
[No. L-14012/50/2013-IR (DU)]
[No. L-14012/51/2013-IR (DU)]
[No. L-14012/52/2013-IR (DU)]
[No. L-14012/53/2013-IR (DU)]
P. K. VENUGOPAL, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE SHRI SURENDRA PRAKASH SINGH,
PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVT.
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT-I,
CHANDIGARH.
Case No. ID No.235 of 2013.
Reference No. L-14012/48/2013-IR(DU) dated 03.03.2014
Shri Sanoj Kumar
Son of shri Rajmal,
R/o H.No.536, New Indira Colony,
Manimajra,Chandigarh
.....Workman
Versus
1.
The General Manager,
M/s. Bharat Electronics Limited,
405, Industrial Area,
Phase-III, Panchkula (Haryana)
2.
The Chief Managing Director,
M/s. Bharat Electronics Limited,
Head Office, Outer Ring Road,
Bangalore.
.....Respondents
Appearances :
For the Workman
: None
For the Management
: Sh. N.K. Zakhmi
AWARD PASSED ON : 02.09.2014
Government of India, Ministry of Labour vide
notification No.L-14012/48/2013-IR (DU) dated 3.3.2014 has
referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for
adjudication:
Term of Reference:
“Whether relationship of employer and employee
exists between Sh. Sanoj kumar Son of Shri Rajmal
and Bharat Electronics Ltd. Panchkula? If yes,
whether action of the Bharat Electronics Ltd.
Panchkula in terminating the services of Sh.Sanoj
w.e.f. 17.4.2013 is legally just and valid? If not, then
to what relief the workman is entitled to and from
which date?”
2.
Case repeatedly called. None appeared for the
workman nor any claim statement has been filed. As per
record three opportunities have been allowed to file claim
statement. None appeared on behalf of the workman despite
notice. It appears that the workman is not interested to
pursue the present reference. In view of the above the
present reference is disposed off for want of prosecution.
3.
Reference is disposed off accordingly. Central Govt.
be informed. Soft copy as well as hard copy be sent to the
Central Govt. for publication.
S. P. SINGH, Presiding Officer
Chandigarh
02.09.2014
6304
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
ANNEXURE
BEFORE SHRI SURENDRA PRAKASH SINGH,
PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVT.
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT-I,
CHANDIGARH
Case No. ID No. 236 of 2013
Reference No. L-14012/49/2013-IR(DU) dated 03.03.2014
Shri Sunil Kumar
son of Shri Ved Pal,
R/o H.No.10, Rajiv Colony,
Sector-17, Panchkula (Haryana)
.....Workman
Versus
1.
The General Manager,
M/s Bharat Electronics Limited,
405, Industrial Area, Phase-III,
Panchkula (Haryana)
2.
The Chief Managing Director,
M/s Bharat Electronics Limited,
Head Office, Outer Ring Road,
Bangalore.
.....Respondents.
Appearances :
For the Workman
: None.
For the Management
: Sh. N. K. Zakhmi
AWARD PASSED ON:-02.09.2014
Government of India Ministry of Labour vide
notification No.L-14012/49/2013-IR(DU) dated 3.3.2014 has
referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for
adjudication:
Term of Reference:
“Whether relationship of employer and employee
exists between Sh. Sunil Kumar Son of Shri Ved Pal
and Bharat Electronics Ltd. Panchkula? If yes,
whether action of the Bharat Electronics Ltd.
Panchkula in terminating the services of Sh.Sunil
Kumar w.e.f. 17.4.2013 is legally just and valid? If
not, then to what relief the workman is entitled to
and from which date?”
2.
Case repeatedly called. None appeared for the
workman nor any claim statement has been filed. As per
record three opportunities have been allowed to file claim
statement. None appeared on behalf of the workman despite
notice. It appears that the workman is not interested to
pursue the present reference. In view of the above the
present reference is disposed off for want of prosecution.
3.
Reference is disposed off accordingly. Central Govt.
be informed. Soft copy as well as hard copy be sent to the
Central Govt. for publication.
S. P. SINGH, Presiding Officer
Chandigarh
02.09.2014
ANNEXURE
BEFORE SHRI SURENDRA PRAKASH SINGH,
PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVT.
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT-I,
CHANDIGARH
Case No. ID No.237 of 2013.
Reference No. L-14012/50/2013 (IR(DU)) dated 03.03.2014
Shri Sanjiv
son of Shri Chander,
R/o H.No.97, Rajiv Colony,
Sector-17, Panchkula (Haryana)
....Workman
Versus
1.
The General Manager,
M/s Bharat Electronics Limited,
405, Industrial Area,
Phase-III, Panchkula (Haryana)
2.
The Chief Managing Director,
M/s Bharat Electronics Limited,
Head Office, Outer Ring Road,
Bangalore.
.....Respondents.
Appearances
For the Workman
: None.
For the Management
: Sh. N.K.Zakhmi
AWARD PASSED ON:-02.09.2014
Government of India Ministry of Labour vide
notification No.L-14012/50/2013/IR (DU) dated 3.3.2014 has
referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for
adjudication:
Term of Reference:
“Whether relationship of employer and employee
exists between Sh. Sanjiv Son of Shri Chander and
Bharat Electronics Ltd. Panchkula? If yes, whether
action of the Bharat Electronics Ltd. Panchkula in
terminating the services of Sh.Sanjiv w.e.f. 8.4.2013
is legally just and valid? If not, then to what relief
the workman is entitled to and from which date?”
2.
Case repeatedly called. None appeared for the
workman nor any claim statement has been filed. As per
record three opportunities have been allowed to file claim
statement. None appeared on behalf of the workman despite
notice. It appears that the workman is not interested to
pursue the present reference. In view of the above the
present reference is disposed off for want of prosecution.
3.
Reference is disposed off accordingly. Central Govt.
be informed. Soft copy as well as hard copy be sent to the
Central Govt. for publication.
S. P. SINGH, Presiding Officer
Chandigarh
02.09.2014
¹Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)º
Hkkjr dk jkti=k % flrEcj 13] 2014@Hkkæ 22] 1936
6305
ANNEXURE
BEFORE SHRI SURENDRA PRAKASH SINGH,
PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVT.
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT-I,
CHANDIGARH
Case No. ID No. 238 of 2013
Reference No. L-14012/51/2013-IR(DU) dated 03.03.2014
Shri Anuj Kumar
son of Shri Babu Ram,
Resident of Village Budhanpur,
Panchkula (Haryana)
.....Workman
Versus
1.
The General Manager,
M/s Bharat Electronics Limited,
405, Industrial Area,
Phase-III, Panchkula (Haryana)
2.
The Chief Managing Director,
M/s Bharat Electronics Limited,
Head Office, Outer Ring Road,
Bangalore.
.....Respondents.
Appearances :
For the Workman
: None
For the Management
: Sh. N.K. Zakhmi
AWARD PASSED ON : 02.09.2014
Government of India Ministry of Labour vide
notification No.L-14012/51/2013-IR (DU) dated 3.3.2014
has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for
adjudication:
Term of Reference:
“Whether relationship of employer and employee
exists between Shri Anuj Kumar son of Shri Babu
Ram and Bharat Electronics Ltd. Panchkula? If yes,
whether action of the Bharat Electronics Ltd.
Panchkula in terminating the services of Sh.Anuj
Kumar w.e.f.17.4.2013 is legally just and valid? If
not, then to what relief the workman is entitled to
and from which date?”
2.
Case repeatedly called. None appeared for the
workman nor any claim statement has been filed. As per
record three opportunities have been allowed to file claim
statement. None appeared on behalf of the workman despite
notice. It appears that the workman is not interested to
pursue the present reference. In view of the above the
present reference is disposed off for want of prosecution.
3.
Reference is disposed off accordingly. Central Govt.
be informed. Soft copy as well as hard copy be sent to the
Central Govt. for publication.
S. P. SINGH, Presiding Officer
Chandigarh
02.09.2014
BEFORE SHRI SURENDRA PRAKASH SINGH,
PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVT.
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT-I,
CHANDIGARH
Case No. ID No.239 of 2013.
Reference No. L-14012/52/2013-IR(DU) dated 03.03.2014
Shri Sultan Singh
son of Shri Rajmal,
Resident of House No. 1103/1,
Rajiv Colony, Sector-17,
Panchkula (Haryana)
.....Workman
Versus
1.
The General Manager,
M/s Bharat Electronics Limited,
405, Industrial Area, Phase-III,
Panchkula (Haryana)
2.
The Chief Managing Director,
M/s Bharat Electronics Limited,
Head Office, Outer Ring Road,
Bangalore.
.....Respondents
Appearances
For the Workman
: None.
For the Management
: Sh. N.K.Zakhmi
AWARD PASSED ON:-02.09.2014
Government of India Ministry of Labour vide
notification No.L-14012/52/2013-IR (DU) dated 3.3.2014 has
referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for
adjudication:
Term of Reference:
“Whether relationship of employer and employee
exists between Shri Sultan Singh son of shri Rajmal
and Bharat Electronics Ltd. Panchkula? If yes,
whether action of the Bharat Electronics Ltd.
Panchkula in terminating the services of Sh.Sultan
Singh w.e.f.13.3.2013 is legally just and valid? If
not, then to what relief the workman is entitled to
and from which date?”
2.
Case repeatedly called. None appeared for the
workman nor any claim statement has been filed. As per
record three opportunities have been allowed to file claim
statement. None appeared on behalf of the workman despite
notice. It appears that the workman is not interested to
pursue the present reference. In view of the above the
present reference is disposed off for want of prosecution.
3.
Reference is disposed off accordingly. Central Govt.
be informed. Soft copy as well as hard copy be sent to the
Central Govt. for publication.
S. P. SINGH, Presiding Officer
Chandigarh
02.09.2014
6306
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 13, 2014/BHADRA 22, 1936
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
ANNEXURE
BEFORE SHRI SURENDRA PRAKASH SINGH,
PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVT.
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT-I,
CHANDIGARH
Case No. ID No. 240 of 2013
Reference No. L-14012/53/2013-IR(DU) dated 03.03.2014
Shri Satyavan
son of Shri Rajmal,
Resident of House No. 1104,
Rajiv Colony, Sector-17,
Panchkula (Haryana)
.....Workman
Versus
1.
The General Manager,
M/s Bharat Electronics Limited,
405, Industrial Area,
Phase-III, Panchkula (Haryana)
2.
The Chief Managing Director,
M/s Bharat Electronics Limited,
Head Office, Outer Ring Road,
Bangalore.
.....Respondents
Appearances :
For the Workman
: None.
For the Management
: Sh. N.K. Zakhmi
AWARD PASSED ON : 02.09.2014
Government of India Ministry of Labour vide
notification No.L-14012/53/2013-IR (DU) dated 3.3.2014 has
referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for
adjudication:
Term of Reference:
“Whether relationship of employer and employee
exists between Shri Satyavan son of Shri Rajmal and
Bharat Electronics Ltd. Panchkula? If yes, whether
action of the Bharat Electronics Ltd. Panchkula in
terminating the services of Sh. Satyavan
w.e.f.1.4.2013 is legally just and valid? If not, then
to what relief the workman is entitled to and from
which date?”
2.
Case repeatedly called. None appeared for the
workman nor any claim statement has been filed. As per
record already three opportunities have been allowed to
file claim statement. None appeared on behalf of the
workman despite notice. It appears that the workman is
not interested to pursue the present reference. In view of
the above the present reference is disposed off for want
of prosecution.
3.
Reference is disposed off accordingly. Central Govt.
be informed. Soft copy as well as hard copy be sent to the
Central Govt. for publication.
S. P. SINGH, Presiding Officer
Chandigarh
02.09.2014
Printed by the Manager, Government of India Press, Ring Road, Mayapuri, New Delhi-110064
and Published by the Controller of Publications, Delhi-110054.